Exod 20
1 Atunci Dumnezeu a rostit toate aceste cuvinte, şi a zis:
2 ,,Eu sânt Domnul, Dumnezeul tău, care te-a scos din ţara Egiptului, din casa robiei.
3 Să nu ai alţi dumnezei afară de Mine.
4 Să nu-ţi faci chip cioplit, nici vreo înfăţişare a lucrurilor cari sânt sus în ceruri, sau jos pe pământ, sau în apele mai de jos de cât pământul.
5 Să nu te închini înaintea lor, şi să nu le slujeşti; căci Eu, Domnul, Dumnezeul tău, sânt un Dumnezeu gelos, care pedepsesc nelegiuirea părinţilor în copii până la al treilea şi la al patrulea neam al celor ce Mă urăsc,
6 şi Mă îndur până la al miilea neam de cei ce Mă iubesc şi păzesc poruncile Mele.
7 Să nu iei în deşert Numele Domnului, Dumnezeului tău; căci Domnul nu va lăsa nepedepsit pe cel ce va lua în deşert Numele Lui.
8 Adu-ţi aminte de ziua de odihnă, ca s-o sfinţeşti.
9 Să lucrezi şase zile, şi să-ţi faci lucrul tău.
10 Dar ziua a şaptea este ziua de odihnă închinată Domnului, Dumnezeului tău: să nu faci nicio lucrare în ea, nici tu, nici fiul tău, nici fiica ta, nici robul tău, nici roaba ta, nici vita ta, nici străinul care este în casa ta.
11 Căci în şase zile a făcut Domnul cerurile, pământul şi marea, şi tot ce este în ele, iar în ziua a şaptea S-a odihnit: de aceea a binecuvântat Domnul ziua de odihnă şi a sfinţit-o.
12 Cinsteşte pe tatăl tău şi pe mama ta, pentruca să ţi se lungească zilele în ţara, pe care ţi-o dă Domnul, Dumnezeul tău.
13 Să nu ucizi.
14 Să nu preacurveşti.
15 Să nu furi.
16 Să nu mărturiseşti strâmb împotriva aproapelui tău.
17 Să nu pofteşti casa aproapelui tău; să nu pofteşti nevasta aproapelui tău, nici robul lui, nici roaba lui, nici boul lui, nici măgarul lui, nici vreun alt lucru, care este al aproapelui tău.
18 Tot poporul auzea tunetele şi sunetul trâmbiţei şi vedea flacările muntelui, care fumega. La priveliştea aceasta, poporul tremura, şi stătea în depărtare.
19 Ei au zis lui Moise: ,,Vorbeşte-ne tu însuţi, şi te vom asculta: dar să nu ne mai vorbească Dumnezeu, ca să nu murim.``
20 Moise a zis poporului: ,,Nu vă spăimântaţi; căci Dumnezeu a venit tocmai ca să vă pună la încercare, şi ca să aveţi frica Lui înaintea ochilor voştri, pentru ca să nu păcătuiţi.``
21 Poporul stătea în depărtare; iar Moise s-a apropiat de norul în care era Dumnezeu.
22 Domnul a zis lui Moise: ,,Aşa să vorbeşti copiilor lui Israel: ,Aţi văzut că v-am vorbit din ceruri.
23 Să nu faceţi dumnezei de argint şi dumnezei de aur, ca să-i puneţi alături de Mine; să nu vă faceţi alţi dumnezei.
24 Să-Mi ridici un altar de pământ, pe care să-ţi aduci arderile-de-tot şi jertfele de mulţămire, oile şi boii. În orice loc în care Îmi voi aduce aminte de Numele Meu, voi veni la tine, şi te voi binecuvânta.
25 Dacă-Mi vei ridica un altar de piatră, să nu-l zideşti din pietre cioplite; căci cum îţi vei pune dalta în piatră, o vei pângări.
26 Să nu te sui la altarul Meu pe trepte, ca să nu ţi se descopere goliciunea înaintea lui.``
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":40965,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","summary_en":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68591,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","summary_en":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96217,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","summary_en":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123843,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","summary_en":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":2566,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and the Bible*, Archaeology","title_en":"and the Bible*, Archaeology","content_ro":"<h3>ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE*<\/h3>\n<p>Simply defined, archaeology is the science that recovers and studies the relics of human antiquity. Biblical archaeology is concerned with the remains scattered across the Near East. Some lie buried at different levels in mounds; others survive as ruins or weathered monuments to past grandeur. Many of the artifacts bear inscriptions of sorts in a variety of ancient languages, some of which still need much study to be understood properly. Other artifacts comprise the material remains of everyday life; broken pottery bowls, charred timbers, trinkets, toys, ornaments, occasional fragments of cloth, rusted weapons, perhaps only the imprint of a woven mat. All must be interpreted carefully in the light of what is known about the period of history from which the objects have been recovered.<\/p>\n<p>Many outstanding archaeological discoveries have been entirely accidental. At Ras Shamra in Syria, a peasant’s plow struck a tomb that led to the discovery of the ancient site of Ugarit. A Bedouin in search of a lost goat discovered the cave at Qumran that contained the Dead Sea Scrolls. In 1887 an Egyptian woman found the Amarna tablets while seeking decomposed bricks for use as fertilizer. In 1945 Egyptians hunting bird manure in caves near Nag Hammadi discovered important Coptic Gnostic manuscripts. Such chance finds, however, are no substitute for systematic surveys.<\/p>\n<p>In modern archaeology potential sites are surveyed carefully, generally photographed from the air, and tested for metals and other underground anomalies by the use of complex electronic equipment. Recovered artifacts are dated according to the level where they occurred in the site and by other methods, including radiocarbon dating. The purpose is to present a chronologically accurate picture of the artifacts and also of the site itself.<\/p>\n<p>The archaeologist and the Near Eastern scholar look at this testimony to ancient life in the realization that they are dealing with factual, objective data. Although there is obviously room for some speculation or difference of opinion, the objects being handled are silent but nevertheless real witnesses to people and events of the past. The relics, therefore, need to be understood in their own right as evidence and must not be manipulated to suit the fancies of some speculative interpretation of history, culture, or religion. Near Eastern archaeology is able to help us understand Scripture by providing objective background data. If, for example, an artifact containing pictographic or other forms of writing can be dated to around 3000 <span>BC<\/span>, that alone tells us that written communications in the locality date back to at least that period. The antiquity of writing is now known to be such that all the early authors of OT material could easily have composed and written down all the narratives credited to them. Thus it is no longer necessary to suppose that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) on the ground that writing had not been invented in his day. In fact, archaeological discoveries have shown that Moses could, and probably did, write in Egyptian hieroglyphics, Babylonian cuneiform, and several Canaanite dialects (of which biblical Hebrew is one). Any theory of Pentateuchal composition that ignores such factual information is obviously wrong in a fundamentally important area.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Archaeology and Daily Life<\/p>\n<p>• Archaeology and Religion<\/p>\n<p>• Archaeology and Warfare<\/p>\n<p>• Archaeology and Literature<\/p>\n<p>• Archaeology and Language<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArchaeologyandDailyLife\">Archaeology and Daily Life<\/p>\n<p>The kind of housing in which the ancients lived has been revealed from excavations at many Near Eastern sites. Neolithic (late Stone Age) dwellings were often simple “wattle-huts” of interwoven sticks, though some showed evidence of artistic interior decoration. The elegant middle-class home at Ur in the time of Abram was attractive even by modern standards. The magnificence of ancient palaces at such sites as Knossos, Persepolis, Mari, and Qantir is abundantly evident even from the ruins. Weaving is now known to be one of the oldest human crafts; the two types of knots used today in making oriental rugs originated in Mesopotamia in the remote past. Of similar antiquity was the manufacture of pottery, glazed and unglazed, some plain and some decorated.<\/p>\n<p>Obscure social customs in Scripture have been illustrated by archaeological discoveries. Abram’s procreation of a child by Hagar, his wife’s servant, was in conformity with local customs at Nuzi and was not regarded as immoral. The adoption of Eliezer by Abram (Gn 15:2-4) is clarified by texts from Nuzi that permitted childless couples to adopt sons who, in return for certain duties to the parents, would inherit the family estate. Such children had the inheritance rights of the firstborn, but their rights could be modified if the adopting parents subsequently had their own children. Texts from Nuzi, Ugarit, and Alalakh show that heads of families could disregard the natural order and choose any one of the sons to inherit firstborn rights (cf. Gn 48:13-22; 49:3-4). Nuzi tablets indicate that such rights could be traded between various members of the family, which accounts for the transaction between Esau and Jacob (Gn 25:31-34).<\/p>\n<p>Work of all kinds in the biblical period has been illustrated from many sources. The Beni Hasan tableau (1900 <span>BC<\/span>) shows traveling Semites bringing goods to Egypt. On one of the animals is a set of portable bellows, suggesting that the travelers may have been metalworkers. Other trades and occupations illustrated from monuments and paintings include hunting, fishing, brick making, various types of agricultural work, pottery making, and other domestic crafts. Such sources also provide valuable information about the way the ancients dressed. Men pictured on the Beni Hasan tableau were bearded and wore short skirts and sandals. Women had long, multicolored dresses fastened at the shoulder with a clasp. They wore shoes and kept their flowing hair in place by means of bands. Another Egyptian painting, dated 500 years later and showing Semites bringing gifts to the pharaoh, indicates that clothing styles had barely changed at all. These illustrations come from lands other than Palestine; the Israelites were forbidden to make representations of human beings or God.<\/p>\n<p>The most common traces of everyday life are potsherds, broken pottery pieces that were discarded in great quantities in settled areas and that can still be found today. Such fragments were often used as materials on which short messages were written, as illustrated by an important group of letters dating from the time of the prophet Jeremiah. The “Lachish letters” were actually military dispatches written in 587 <span>BC<\/span> from an outpost north of Lachish to one of the officers defending Lachish itself. Centuries later in NT times potsherds were still popular as writing materials because they were more durable than Egyptian papyrus and more convenient than waxed writing boards. Rectangular wooden palettes with a slot for the rush pens and rounded hollows for the little tablets of red and black ink have been found in Egypt. Remains of some of the ink actually used in writing the Dead Sea Scrolls have been recovered from the settlement at Qumran.<\/p>\n<p>In antiquity, various games were played by children and adults alike. From a tomb at Beni Hasan (c. 2000 <span>BC<\/span>) came a painting of pigtailed Egyptian girls keeping several balls up in the air at once. A relief in a temple at Thebes showed Ramses III playing draughts (checkers) with a concubine. Egyptian children of a later period played a game using pebbles that was perhaps the ancestor of backgammon. From Megiddo came an ivory gaming board with holes, presumably for pegs (c. 1200 <span>BC<\/span>). Children’s toys recovered from Near Eastern sites include whistles, leather-covered balls, model chariots, and animals on wheels, showing that tastes have changed very little over the ages. Adult sports such as wrestling, archery, and running were depicted in Egyptian tomb paintings.<\/p>\n<p>The embalming of Jacob and Joseph (Gn 50:2-3, 26) represented a social custom of long standing in Egypt and is thoroughly consistent with the background of the narrative. Jacob was buried in the cave of Machpelah with Sarah, Abraham, and others; although the site is well known, it cannot be excavated because it is venerated by the Arabs as the sacred resting place of their ancestor Abraham.<\/p>\n<p>An inscription associated with an ancient Hebrew burial site was found in the Russian Museum on the Mt of Olives in 1931. At some point it had been removed from the grave site. It reads, “Hither were brought the bones of Uzziah king of Judah—do not open.” The inscription came from Christ’s time, suggesting that the original tomb of the great ruler had been found during excavations in Jerusalem and that the remains had been transferred to another site. Archaeologists have shown that the kind of stone door covering the entrance to Christ’s tomb was in fashion chiefly from about 100 <span>BC<\/span> to about <span>AD<\/span> 100, which is consistent with the Gospel records.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArchaeologyandReligion\">Archaeology and Religion<\/p>\n<p>Archaeological excavations have done much to indicate the nature of biblical religion and worship. Long before Abram left Ur at the command of the one true God, pagan Mesopotamian peoples worshiped individual gods and recognized them as celestial deities or “sky gods.” There is thus nothing inherently impossible or improbable about the relationship of the Hebrew patriarchs to the God whom they served and venerated. The worship of heathen deities in portable shrines has been illustrated from a relief of Ramses II, which showed the divine tent in the middle of the Egyptian encampment. In addition, seventhcentury BC Phoenician writings referred to a portable shrine pulled by oxen. The Israelite wilderness tabernacle thus fits properly into that kind of background and is not of comparatively late origin, as was once supposed.<\/p>\n<p>The tradition of singers participating in preexilic worship has been verified by archaeological discoveries indicating that for centuries the Palestinians had been noted for their musical abilities. Tablets from Ras Shamra (Ugarit) are full of religious poetry, some of which contains phrases similar to expressions in the Hebrew psalms. Solomon’s temple was built by Phoenician (Canaanite) workmen according to a ground plan (cf. 1 Kgs 6) similar to that of the eighth-century <span>BC<\/span> chapel found at Tel Tainat in Syria. The Wailing Wall in Jerusalem is thought to contain stones going back to Nehemiah’s time, but no traces of Solomon’s foundations have yet been uncovered in the city. Pieces of masonry from Herod’s temple, demolished in <span>AD<\/span> 70, have come to light and furnish interesting factual information about the appearance of contemporary pillars and supporting structures. Though there were supposedly many synagogues in Palestine in Christ’s time, few remains of any significance have survived.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArchaeologyandWarfare\">Archaeology and Warfare<\/p>\n<p>Understanding of ancient warfare, a prominent biblical theme, has been assisted greatly by the work of archaeologists. Ancient Near Eastern peoples regarded war as conflict between the gods of the opposing nations. Military service was therefore regarded as a sacred calling, and soldiers were members of an honored profession. In his capacity as Lord of hosts, God was the commander in chief of the Hebrew army; he could order a city to be given up to the “ban,” that is, to complete destruction (cf. Jos 6:17, 24). War was waged according to well-understood rules. An enemy threatening the safety of a city would normally send its inhabitants a demand for surrender. If it was accepted, all lives were spared, though property would be plundered. If the demand was rejected, the besieged city dwellers knew that if their defenses were breached, they might all be killed. Frontal assaults, spies, ambushes, and armed patrols were all used in warfare. Sometimes battles were decided by the outcome of combat between champions (1 Sm 17:38-54).<\/p>\n<p>Ancient armor was pictured widely on reliefs and monuments, supplementing the artifacts that have been recovered. A magnificent golden helmet from Ur is an outstanding example of Sumerian military equipment, contrasting with the much smaller Hittite helmets depicted on a tomb wall at Karnak. Metal helmets (cf. 1 Sm 17:38) were worn initially only by leaders in the Israelite armies, but by Seleucid times all Hebrew soldiers were issued bronze helmets (1 Macc 6:35). Roman legionnaires commonly wore either leather or bronze helmets. The Hebrews used two kinds of shields: a large one protected the whole body and was designed for use by infantry; the other, smaller one was carried by archers (cf. 2 Chr 14:8). Such shields were generally of wood-and-leather construction, though occasionally made of bronze. Coats of scale armor (cf. Jer 46:4) were used in the Near East from at least the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>, as indicated by the recovery of such scales from Alalakh and Ugarit. Swords and spears, a normal part of Hebrew weaponry, came in a variety of shapes and sizes, as illustrated on monuments and bas-reliefs. Furnaces used for manufacturing swords were found at Gerar; Bronze Age daggers have been recovered from Lachish and Megiddo. The compound Asiatic bow, made of wood, horn, and tendons attached to iron limbs, was the successor of the Semitic weapon depicted on the Beni Hasan tableau. Discovery of names inscribed on arrowheads dating between 1300 and 900 <span>BC<\/span> seems to indicate the existence of companies of archers (cf. Is 21:17). Very little is said in the NT about contemporary military equipment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArchaeologyandLiterature\">Archaeology and Literature<\/p>\n<p>Many types of biblical literature have been paralleled in counterparts discovered in the Near East. Excavators at Ras Shamra found poetic and prose tablets that contain grammatical and literary forms occurring in the Hebrew psalms. It is now incorrect to suppose that detailed law codes such as those in the Pentateuch were not compiled until after the time of Moses, because fragmentary Sumerian codes dating from about the 19th century <span>BC<\/span> exhibit the same legislative tendencies. The code of the Babylonian ruler Hammurabi (18th century <span>BC<\/span>), based on earlier Sumerian legislation, expanded the principles of justice into nearly 300 sections. Hammurabi’s code was an attempt to stabilize contemporary society on the basis of law and order. Its style is interesting; it commenced with a poetic prologue, followed by the prose legal section, and concluded with a prose epilogue. This three-part literary pattern also appears in the book of Job (prose-poetry-prose), as well as in more modern writings.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant structure of Exodus 20:1-17 and its fuller form in Deuteronomy have been examined in light of the literary structure of second-millennium <span>BC<\/span> Hittite vassal treaties from Boghazkôy. The treaties were drawn up according to a standard pattern, the elements of which occur wholly or in part in the various OT covenantal passages (Ex 20:1-17; Lv 18:1-30; Dt 1:1–31:30; Jer 31:31-37).<\/p>\n<p>What appear to be 11 Mesopotamian tablet forms in Genesis can be isolated by the recurrence of the phrase “these are the generations of” in the <span>kjv<\/span> and some modern versions. The phrase and its accompanying material correspond to the colophon (notation about a publication, often found on the very last page of modern books) of undamaged Mesopotamian tablets. Genealogical material such as occurs in Genesis was also found on clay tablets from Nuzi. The terse style of the earlier Genesis historical accounts is reminiscent of Sumerian history writing.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew wisdom literature such as Proverbs has been paralleled from Egypt by the “Instruction of Amenemope,” where Proverbs 22:17–24:22 in particular is close in content to the Egyptian material. Scholars have yet to decide if one depended on the other, or if both went back to an even earlier source that has not survived.<\/p>\n<p>The epistolary (letter) form was a common feature of the ancient world (2 Sm 11; 1 Kgs 21; 2 Kgs 5:10, 20; Ezr 4:6-7; Neh 2:7). Many collections of Egyptian papyri, such as the Zenon documents, consisted of letters. Among the Greeks the letter form dated back to Plato. His <em>Seventh Letter<\/em> (c. 354 <span>BC<\/span>) is interesting because it attempted to rebut contemporary misunderstandings of his teaching and personal behavior. Certain of the apostle Paul’s letters (Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, Thessalonians) also stand in that general tradition. Paul’s Letter to Philemon corresponds closely to papyrus letters from Egypt of a purely personal nature.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArchaeologyandLanguage\">Archaeology and Language<\/p>\n<p>Recovery of many ancient Near Eastern languages has done much to clarify our understanding of the OT. Expressions now known to be Sumerian and Akkadian occur not only in Genesis but elsewhere in the Scriptures. Thus in Genesis 1:1 the phrase “the heavens and the earth” is a Sumerian expression <em>(an-ki)<\/em> meaning “universe”; the pair of antonyms (words opposite in meaning) expresses totality. Revelation 22:13 uses this literary device to express the same concept in three different ways.<\/p>\n<p>Ugaritic and Eblaic, both west Semitic dialects, are closely related to Hebrew and contain striking literary similarities. Reference to archaic Ugaritic expressions has made it possible to translate properly some obscure Hebrew poetic language that is now seen to have preserved genuine ancient Canaanite phraseology.<\/p>\n<p>Aramaic, another northwest Semitic language, was spoken in the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>, and is represented in the OT principally by chapters in Ezra and Daniel. These were written in imperial Aramaic, as are the Elephantine papyri of the fifth and fourth centuries <span>BC<\/span>. It is now known, on the basis of the Aramaic used, to be linguistically incorrect to assign a late date to either Ezra or Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>The NT was written in <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koine<\/span><em>,<\/em> or “common” Greek, the language of the Near East and the Roman Empire. NT common Greek differs from other Greek dialects in containing underlying Semitic expressions, which are frequently unrecognized and therefore mistranslated by the unwary.<\/p>\n<p>From the foregoing it is evident that archaeological discoveries have done much to enlarge our knowledge of the ancient world. Even with the limited data at our disposal it is possible to see the men and women of Scripture as real persons, living mostly in times of stress and uncertainty but often enjoying a high degree of culture unmatched until modern times. We see such persons as they should be seen—not as mythical or legendary figures, but as true children of their age, grappling with life’s problems and catching periodically a vision of God as all powerful and all holy, guiding the destinies of individuals and nations and bringing his purposes to pass in history. Archaeology has shown that the Hebrews must never be studied separately from other ancient Near Eastern peoples but instead must be seen as one element of a vast cultural complex that included such diverse peoples as the Sumerians and the Aegeans.<\/p>\n<p>Such study must be pursued in a consistently objective fashion, arguing from relevant evidence to a proper understanding of biblical events and life. It is sometimes difficult to reconcile certain accepted interpretations of archaeological data and the evidence of Scripture. Such conflicts are few in number, however, and tend to diminish noticeably as new information is forthcoming. In principle the archaeologist has no particular interest in “proving the truth” of the Scriptures, and it is obviously impossible for a spade or a trowel to prove or disprove the spiritual revelations and assertions of Scripture. But it is fair to say that archaeology validates Hebrew history and explains many formerly obscure terms and traditions in both the OT and NT. It thus provides an authentic background for the prophecies culminating in Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE*<\/h3>\n<p>Simply defined, archaeology is the science that recovers and studies the relics of human antiquity. Biblical archaeology is concerned with the remains scattered across the Near East. Some lie buried at different levels in mounds; others survive as ruins or weathered monuments to past grandeur. Many of the artifacts bear inscriptions of sorts in a variety of ancient languages, some of which still need much study to be understood properly. Other artifacts comprise the material remains of everyday life; broken pottery bowls, charred timbers, trinkets, toys, ornaments, occasional fragments of cloth, rusted weapons, perhaps only the imprint of a woven mat. All must be interpreted carefully in the light of what is known about the period of history from which the objects have been recovered.<\/p>\n<p>Many outstanding archaeological discoveries have been entirely accidental. At Ras Shamra in Syria, a peasant’s plow struck a tomb that led to the discovery of the ancient site of Ugarit. A Bedouin in search of a lost goat discovered the cave at Qumran that contained the Dead Sea Scrolls. In 1887 an Egyptian woman found the Amarna tablets while seeking decomposed bricks for use as fertilizer. In 1945 Egyptians hunting bird manure in caves near Nag Hammadi discovered important Coptic Gnostic manuscripts. Such chance finds, however, are no substitute for systematic surveys.<\/p>\n<p>In modern archaeology potential sites are surveyed carefully, generally photographed from the air, and tested for metals and other underground anomalies by the use of complex electronic equipment. Recovered artifacts are dated according to the level where they occurred in the site and by other methods, including radiocarbon dating. The purpose is to present a chronologically accurate picture of the artifacts and also of the site itself.<\/p>\n<p>The archaeologist and the Near Eastern scholar look at this testimony to ancient life in the realization that they are dealing with factual, objective data. Although there is obviously room for some speculation or difference of opinion, the objects being handled are silent but nevertheless real witnesses to people and events of the past. The relics, therefore, need to be understood in their own right as evidence and must not be manipulated to suit the fancies of some speculative interpretation of history, culture, or religion. Near Eastern archaeology is able to help us understand Scripture by providing objective background data. If, for example, an artifact containing pictographic or other forms of writing can be dated to around 3000 <span>BC<\/span>, that alone tells us that written communications in the locality date back to at least that period. The antiquity of writing is now known to be such that all the early authors of OT material could easily have composed and written down all the narratives credited to them. Thus it is no longer necessary to suppose that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) on the ground that writing had not been invented in his day. In fact, archaeological discoveries have shown that Moses could, and probably did, write in Egyptian hieroglyphics, Babylonian cuneiform, and several Canaanite dialects (of which biblical Hebrew is one). Any theory of Pentateuchal composition that ignores such factual information is obviously wrong in a fundamentally important area.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Archaeology and Daily Life<\/p>\n<p>• Archaeology and Religion<\/p>\n<p>• Archaeology and Warfare<\/p>\n<p>• Archaeology and Literature<\/p>\n<p>• Archaeology and Language<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArchaeologyandDailyLife\">Archaeology and Daily Life<\/p>\n<p>The kind of housing in which the ancients lived has been revealed from excavations at many Near Eastern sites. Neolithic (late Stone Age) dwellings were often simple “wattle-huts” of interwoven sticks, though some showed evidence of artistic interior decoration. The elegant middle-class home at Ur in the time of Abram was attractive even by modern standards. The magnificence of ancient palaces at such sites as Knossos, Persepolis, Mari, and Qantir is abundantly evident even from the ruins. Weaving is now known to be one of the oldest human crafts; the two types of knots used today in making oriental rugs originated in Mesopotamia in the remote past. Of similar antiquity was the manufacture of pottery, glazed and unglazed, some plain and some decorated.<\/p>\n<p>Obscure social customs in Scripture have been illustrated by archaeological discoveries. Abram’s procreation of a child by Hagar, his wife’s servant, was in conformity with local customs at Nuzi and was not regarded as immoral. The adoption of Eliezer by Abram (Gn 15:2-4) is clarified by texts from Nuzi that permitted childless couples to adopt sons who, in return for certain duties to the parents, would inherit the family estate. Such children had the inheritance rights of the firstborn, but their rights could be modified if the adopting parents subsequently had their own children. Texts from Nuzi, Ugarit, and Alalakh show that heads of families could disregard the natural order and choose any one of the sons to inherit firstborn rights (cf. Gn 48:13-22; 49:3-4). Nuzi tablets indicate that such rights could be traded between various members of the family, which accounts for the transaction between Esau and Jacob (Gn 25:31-34).<\/p>\n<p>Work of all kinds in the biblical period has been illustrated from many sources. The Beni Hasan tableau (1900 <span>BC<\/span>) shows traveling Semites bringing goods to Egypt. On one of the animals is a set of portable bellows, suggesting that the travelers may have been metalworkers. Other trades and occupations illustrated from monuments and paintings include hunting, fishing, brick making, various types of agricultural work, pottery making, and other domestic crafts. Such sources also provide valuable information about the way the ancients dressed. Men pictured on the Beni Hasan tableau were bearded and wore short skirts and sandals. Women had long, multicolored dresses fastened at the shoulder with a clasp. They wore shoes and kept their flowing hair in place by means of bands. Another Egyptian painting, dated 500 years later and showing Semites bringing gifts to the pharaoh, indicates that clothing styles had barely changed at all. These illustrations come from lands other than Palestine; the Israelites were forbidden to make representations of human beings or God.<\/p>\n<p>The most common traces of everyday life are potsherds, broken pottery pieces that were discarded in great quantities in settled areas and that can still be found today. Such fragments were often used as materials on which short messages were written, as illustrated by an important group of letters dating from the time of the prophet Jeremiah. The “Lachish letters” were actually military dispatches written in 587 <span>BC<\/span> from an outpost north of Lachish to one of the officers defending Lachish itself. Centuries later in NT times potsherds were still popular as writing materials because they were more durable than Egyptian papyrus and more convenient than waxed writing boards. Rectangular wooden palettes with a slot for the rush pens and rounded hollows for the little tablets of red and black ink have been found in Egypt. Remains of some of the ink actually used in writing the Dead Sea Scrolls have been recovered from the settlement at Qumran.<\/p>\n<p>In antiquity, various games were played by children and adults alike. From a tomb at Beni Hasan (c. 2000 <span>BC<\/span>) came a painting of pigtailed Egyptian girls keeping several balls up in the air at once. A relief in a temple at Thebes showed Ramses III playing draughts (checkers) with a concubine. Egyptian children of a later period played a game using pebbles that was perhaps the ancestor of backgammon. From Megiddo came an ivory gaming board with holes, presumably for pegs (c. 1200 <span>BC<\/span>). Children’s toys recovered from Near Eastern sites include whistles, leather-covered balls, model chariots, and animals on wheels, showing that tastes have changed very little over the ages. Adult sports such as wrestling, archery, and running were depicted in Egyptian tomb paintings.<\/p>\n<p>The embalming of Jacob and Joseph (Gn 50:2-3, 26) represented a social custom of long standing in Egypt and is thoroughly consistent with the background of the narrative. Jacob was buried in the cave of Machpelah with Sarah, Abraham, and others; although the site is well known, it cannot be excavated because it is venerated by the Arabs as the sacred resting place of their ancestor Abraham.<\/p>\n<p>An inscription associated with an ancient Hebrew burial site was found in the Russian Museum on the Mt of Olives in 1931. At some point it had been removed from the grave site. It reads, “Hither were brought the bones of Uzziah king of Judah—do not open.” The inscription came from Christ’s time, suggesting that the original tomb of the great ruler had been found during excavations in Jerusalem and that the remains had been transferred to another site. Archaeologists have shown that the kind of stone door covering the entrance to Christ’s tomb was in fashion chiefly from about 100 <span>BC<\/span> to about <span>AD<\/span> 100, which is consistent with the Gospel records.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArchaeologyandReligion\">Archaeology and Religion<\/p>\n<p>Archaeological excavations have done much to indicate the nature of biblical religion and worship. Long before Abram left Ur at the command of the one true God, pagan Mesopotamian peoples worshiped individual gods and recognized them as celestial deities or “sky gods.” There is thus nothing inherently impossible or improbable about the relationship of the Hebrew patriarchs to the God whom they served and venerated. The worship of heathen deities in portable shrines has been illustrated from a relief of Ramses II, which showed the divine tent in the middle of the Egyptian encampment. In addition, seventhcentury BC Phoenician writings referred to a portable shrine pulled by oxen. The Israelite wilderness tabernacle thus fits properly into that kind of background and is not of comparatively late origin, as was once supposed.<\/p>\n<p>The tradition of singers participating in preexilic worship has been verified by archaeological discoveries indicating that for centuries the Palestinians had been noted for their musical abilities. Tablets from Ras Shamra (Ugarit) are full of religious poetry, some of which contains phrases similar to expressions in the Hebrew psalms. Solomon’s temple was built by Phoenician (Canaanite) workmen according to a ground plan (cf. 1 Kgs 6) similar to that of the eighth-century <span>BC<\/span> chapel found at Tel Tainat in Syria. The Wailing Wall in Jerusalem is thought to contain stones going back to Nehemiah’s time, but no traces of Solomon’s foundations have yet been uncovered in the city. Pieces of masonry from Herod’s temple, demolished in <span>AD<\/span> 70, have come to light and furnish interesting factual information about the appearance of contemporary pillars and supporting structures. Though there were supposedly many synagogues in Palestine in Christ’s time, few remains of any significance have survived.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArchaeologyandWarfare\">Archaeology and Warfare<\/p>\n<p>Understanding of ancient warfare, a prominent biblical theme, has been assisted greatly by the work of archaeologists. Ancient Near Eastern peoples regarded war as conflict between the gods of the opposing nations. Military service was therefore regarded as a sacred calling, and soldiers were members of an honored profession. In his capacity as Lord of hosts, God was the commander in chief of the Hebrew army; he could order a city to be given up to the “ban,” that is, to complete destruction (cf. Jos 6:17, 24). War was waged according to well-understood rules. An enemy threatening the safety of a city would normally send its inhabitants a demand for surrender. If it was accepted, all lives were spared, though property would be plundered. If the demand was rejected, the besieged city dwellers knew that if their defenses were breached, they might all be killed. Frontal assaults, spies, ambushes, and armed patrols were all used in warfare. Sometimes battles were decided by the outcome of combat between champions (1 Sm 17:38-54).<\/p>\n<p>Ancient armor was pictured widely on reliefs and monuments, supplementing the artifacts that have been recovered. A magnificent golden helmet from Ur is an outstanding example of Sumerian military equipment, contrasting with the much smaller Hittite helmets depicted on a tomb wall at Karnak. Metal helmets (cf. 1 Sm 17:38) were worn initially only by leaders in the Israelite armies, but by Seleucid times all Hebrew soldiers were issued bronze helmets (1 Macc 6:35). Roman legionnaires commonly wore either leather or bronze helmets. The Hebrews used two kinds of shields: a large one protected the whole body and was designed for use by infantry; the other, smaller one was carried by archers (cf. 2 Chr 14:8). Such shields were generally of wood-and-leather construction, though occasionally made of bronze. Coats of scale armor (cf. Jer 46:4) were used in the Near East from at least the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>, as indicated by the recovery of such scales from Alalakh and Ugarit. Swords and spears, a normal part of Hebrew weaponry, came in a variety of shapes and sizes, as illustrated on monuments and bas-reliefs. Furnaces used for manufacturing swords were found at Gerar; Bronze Age daggers have been recovered from Lachish and Megiddo. The compound Asiatic bow, made of wood, horn, and tendons attached to iron limbs, was the successor of the Semitic weapon depicted on the Beni Hasan tableau. Discovery of names inscribed on arrowheads dating between 1300 and 900 <span>BC<\/span> seems to indicate the existence of companies of archers (cf. Is 21:17). Very little is said in the NT about contemporary military equipment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArchaeologyandLiterature\">Archaeology and Literature<\/p>\n<p>Many types of biblical literature have been paralleled in counterparts discovered in the Near East. Excavators at Ras Shamra found poetic and prose tablets that contain grammatical and literary forms occurring in the Hebrew psalms. It is now incorrect to suppose that detailed law codes such as those in the Pentateuch were not compiled until after the time of Moses, because fragmentary Sumerian codes dating from about the 19th century <span>BC<\/span> exhibit the same legislative tendencies. The code of the Babylonian ruler Hammurabi (18th century <span>BC<\/span>), based on earlier Sumerian legislation, expanded the principles of justice into nearly 300 sections. Hammurabi’s code was an attempt to stabilize contemporary society on the basis of law and order. Its style is interesting; it commenced with a poetic prologue, followed by the prose legal section, and concluded with a prose epilogue. This three-part literary pattern also appears in the book of Job (prose-poetry-prose), as well as in more modern writings.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant structure of Exodus 20:1-17 and its fuller form in Deuteronomy have been examined in light of the literary structure of second-millennium <span>BC<\/span> Hittite vassal treaties from Boghazkôy. The treaties were drawn up according to a standard pattern, the elements of which occur wholly or in part in the various OT covenantal passages (Ex 20:1-17; Lv 18:1-30; Dt 1:1–31:30; Jer 31:31-37).<\/p>\n<p>What appear to be 11 Mesopotamian tablet forms in Genesis can be isolated by the recurrence of the phrase “these are the generations of” in the <span>kjv<\/span> and some modern versions. The phrase and its accompanying material correspond to the colophon (notation about a publication, often found on the very last page of modern books) of undamaged Mesopotamian tablets. Genealogical material such as occurs in Genesis was also found on clay tablets from Nuzi. The terse style of the earlier Genesis historical accounts is reminiscent of Sumerian history writing.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew wisdom literature such as Proverbs has been paralleled from Egypt by the “Instruction of Amenemope,” where Proverbs 22:17–24:22 in particular is close in content to the Egyptian material. Scholars have yet to decide if one depended on the other, or if both went back to an even earlier source that has not survived.<\/p>\n<p>The epistolary (letter) form was a common feature of the ancient world (2 Sm 11; 1 Kgs 21; 2 Kgs 5:10, 20; Ezr 4:6-7; Neh 2:7). Many collections of Egyptian papyri, such as the Zenon documents, consisted of letters. Among the Greeks the letter form dated back to Plato. His <em>Seventh Letter<\/em> (c. 354 <span>BC<\/span>) is interesting because it attempted to rebut contemporary misunderstandings of his teaching and personal behavior. Certain of the apostle Paul’s letters (Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, Thessalonians) also stand in that general tradition. Paul’s Letter to Philemon corresponds closely to papyrus letters from Egypt of a purely personal nature.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArchaeologyandLanguage\">Archaeology and Language<\/p>\n<p>Recovery of many ancient Near Eastern languages has done much to clarify our understanding of the OT. Expressions now known to be Sumerian and Akkadian occur not only in Genesis but elsewhere in the Scriptures. Thus in Genesis 1:1 the phrase “the heavens and the earth” is a Sumerian expression <em>(an-ki)<\/em> meaning “universe”; the pair of antonyms (words opposite in meaning) expresses totality. Revelation 22:13 uses this literary device to express the same concept in three different ways.<\/p>\n<p>Ugaritic and Eblaic, both west Semitic dialects, are closely related to Hebrew and contain striking literary similarities. Reference to archaic Ugaritic expressions has made it possible to translate properly some obscure Hebrew poetic language that is now seen to have preserved genuine ancient Canaanite phraseology.<\/p>\n<p>Aramaic, another northwest Semitic language, was spoken in the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>, and is represented in the OT principally by chapters in Ezra and Daniel. These were written in imperial Aramaic, as are the Elephantine papyri of the fifth and fourth centuries <span>BC<\/span>. It is now known, on the basis of the Aramaic used, to be linguistically incorrect to assign a late date to either Ezra or Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>The NT was written in <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koine<\/span><em>,<\/em> or “common” Greek, the language of the Near East and the Roman Empire. NT common Greek differs from other Greek dialects in containing underlying Semitic expressions, which are frequently unrecognized and therefore mistranslated by the unwary.<\/p>\n<p>From the foregoing it is evident that archaeological discoveries have done much to enlarge our knowledge of the ancient world. Even with the limited data at our disposal it is possible to see the men and women of Scripture as real persons, living mostly in times of stress and uncertainty but often enjoying a high degree of culture unmatched until modern times. We see such persons as they should be seen—not as mythical or legendary figures, but as true children of their age, grappling with life’s problems and catching periodically a vision of God as all powerful and all holy, guiding the destinies of individuals and nations and bringing his purposes to pass in history. Archaeology has shown that the Hebrews must never be studied separately from other ancient Near Eastern peoples but instead must be seen as one element of a vast cultural complex that included such diverse peoples as the Sumerians and the Aegeans.<\/p>\n<p>Such study must be pursued in a consistently objective fashion, arguing from relevant evidence to a proper understanding of biblical events and life. It is sometimes difficult to reconcile certain accepted interpretations of archaeological data and the evidence of Scripture. Such conflicts are few in number, however, and tend to diminish noticeably as new information is forthcoming. In principle the archaeologist has no particular interest in “proving the truth” of the Scriptures, and it is obviously impossible for a spade or a trowel to prove or disprove the spiritual revelations and assertions of Scripture. But it is fair to say that archaeology validates Hebrew history and explains many formerly obscure terms and traditions in both the OT and NT. It thus provides an authentic background for the prophecies culminating in Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE* Simply defined, archaeology is the science that recovers and studies the relics of human antiquity. Biblical archaeology is concerned with the remains scattered across the Near East. Some lie buried at different levels in mounds; others survive as ruins or weathered monuments to past grandeur. Many of the artifacts bear inscriptions of sorts in a variety of ancient languages, some of which still need much study to be understood properly. Other artifacts comprise the...","summary_en":"ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE* Simply defined, archaeology is the science that recovers and studies the relics of human antiquity. Biblical archaeology is concerned with the remains scattered across the Near East. Some lie buried at different levels in mounds; others survive as ruins or weathered monuments to past grandeur. Many of the artifacts bear inscriptions of sorts in a variety of ancient languages, some of which still need much study to be understood properly. Other artifacts comprise the...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5505,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book","title_en":"Book","content_ro":"<h3>BOOK<\/h3>\n<p>A set of written sheets or a scroll—whether composed of wood, parchment, papyrus, or paper—containing records or a literary composition. With respect to the Bible, each individual composition is called a “book” because that was what the document was before it became part of the biblical collection. As such, the Bible has 66 books—such as Genesis, Isaiah, Matthew, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>The most important book to the ancient Hebrews was the Book of the Law (2 Kgs 22:8), because it came from God to Moses (Jos 23:6; Mk 12:26) and contained the record of the Mosaic covenant (e.g., Ex 20). God instructed Joshua to meditate on it day and night (Jos 1:8). The prophets appealed to it constantly, particularly to Deuteronomy. The discovery of the Book of the Law during the renovation of the temple in Josiah’s reign led to important religious reforms (2 Kgs 22:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Some books specifically labeled as biblical source materials are the Book of the Wars of the Lord (Nm 21:14), the Book of Jashar (Jos 10:13; 2 Sm 1:18), the Book of the Acts of Solomon (1 Kgs 11:41), and the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah (14:29). A number of prophetic works are cited in the books of Chronicles as sources for the material recorded in those books. Some of these are the Chronicles of Samuel the Seer, the Chronicles of Nathan the Prophet, the Chronicles of Gad the Seer (1 Chr 29:29), and the Prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite (2 Chr 9:29). The fact that prophetic sources were used for Chronicles demonstrates that the Hebrew people regarded their history as the record of God’s activity. <em>See<\/em> Writing.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BOOK<\/h3>\n<p>A set of written sheets or a scroll—whether composed of wood, parchment, papyrus, or paper—containing records or a literary composition. With respect to the Bible, each individual composition is called a “book” because that was what the document was before it became part of the biblical collection. As such, the Bible has 66 books—such as Genesis, Isaiah, Matthew, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>The most important book to the ancient Hebrews was the Book of the Law (2 Kgs 22:8), because it came from God to Moses (Jos 23:6; Mk 12:26) and contained the record of the Mosaic covenant (e.g., Ex 20). God instructed Joshua to meditate on it day and night (Jos 1:8). The prophets appealed to it constantly, particularly to Deuteronomy. The discovery of the Book of the Law during the renovation of the temple in Josiah’s reign led to important religious reforms (2 Kgs 22:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Some books specifically labeled as biblical source materials are the Book of the Wars of the Lord (Nm 21:14), the Book of Jashar (Jos 10:13; 2 Sm 1:18), the Book of the Acts of Solomon (1 Kgs 11:41), and the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah (14:29). A number of prophetic works are cited in the books of Chronicles as sources for the material recorded in those books. Some of these are the Chronicles of Samuel the Seer, the Chronicles of Nathan the Prophet, the Chronicles of Gad the Seer (1 Chr 29:29), and the Prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite (2 Chr 9:29). The fact that prophetic sources were used for Chronicles demonstrates that the Hebrew people regarded their history as the record of God’s activity. <em>See<\/em> Writing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BOOK A set of written sheets or a scroll—whether composed of wood, parchment, papyrus, or paper—containing records or a literary composition. With respect to the Bible, each individual composition is called a “book” because that was what the document was before it became part of the biblical collection. As such, the Bible has 66 books—such as Genesis, Isaiah, Matthew, and Revelation. The most important book to the ancient Hebrews was the Book of the Law (2 Kgs 22:8), because it came from God ...","summary_en":"BOOK A set of written sheets or a scroll—whether composed of wood, parchment, papyrus, or paper—containing records or a literary composition. With respect to the Bible, each individual composition is called a “book” because that was what the document was before it became part of the biblical collection. As such, the Bible has 66 books—such as Genesis, Isaiah, Matthew, and Revelation. The most important book to the ancient Hebrews was the Book of the Law (2 Kgs 22:8), because it came from God ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5534,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of the Covenant","title_en":"Book of the Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>BOOK OF THE COVENANT<\/h3>\n<p>Term occurring in two OT contexts. It describes, first, a document read by Moses to the people of Israel at Mt Sinai (Ex 24:7), and second, a document discovered in the temple by Hilkiah the priest at the time of King Josiah’s program of repairing the temple (2 Kgs 23:2, 21; 2 Chr 34:30). The term “covenant” refers to the covenant laws that God made with his people Israel in the time of Moses. The Hebrew term “book” means any written document, whether written on clay or stone tablets or on parchment scrolls. Ancient covenants were often in written form. The main problem in understanding the two references to “book of the covenant” is in trying to determine the concepts of those particular documents.<\/p>\n<p>The book read at Mt Sinai has been taken to refer either to the Ten Commandments or to the whole section of Exodus 20 to 23, minus the narrative parts. Since the people responded, “All that the Lord has spoken we will do,” it was evidently legal in its thrust, but it seems impossible to define its contents more precisely than that. The fact that Moses wrote the book (Ex 24:4) need not exclude the Ten Commandments, which are explicitly stated to have been written by God (32:15-16). Moses could also have written them down, perhaps in a preliminary stage (19:25; 20:1).<\/p>\n<p>The content of the “book of the covenant” read by King Josiah to the people of Judah is uncertain. Some scholars have tried to reconstruct its contents on the basis of Josiah’s reforms, concluding that those reforms were similar to principles taught in the book of Deuteronomy. That approach has several weaknesses. First, some of the reforms are nowhere mentioned in the Law (e.g., burning the chariots of the sun—2 Kgs 23:11) and would have to represent inferences Josiah derived from the Law. It becomes unclear how much of his reform was based on explicit passages in the Book of the Covenant and how much on inferences. Second, the account in 2 Chronicles 34:30-33 indicates that much of the reform took place <em>before<\/em> discovery of the Book of the Covenant.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, explicit statements in 2 Kings indicate that some of the reforms were based on the Book of the Covenant. Thus the book must have contained instructions on the Passover (2 Kgs 23:21). It probably dealt with mediums, wizards, and other idolatrous practices, unless that reform was an inference suggested by the wording. In addition, the book evidently contained warnings of the destruction God would bring if his words were not followed (22:16-19). Those expressions probably indicate that Josiah’s Book of the Covenant was larger than Exodus 21–23. In the older book, the Passover is mentioned only as the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Ex 23:15). Exodus 22:18 might possibly give a basis for Josiah’s action against wizards. But in Exodus 21–23 no statement of judgment for disobedience is sufficient to explain the wording of 2 Kings 22:16-19; the closest thing to it is Exodus 23:33.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the fact that Josiah’s Book of the Covenant is also called the Book of the Law (2 Kgs 22:8) suggests that numerous references to the Book of the Law in the OT should also be understood as referring to the Book of the Covenant.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Exodus, Book of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BOOK OF THE COVENANT<\/h3>\n<p>Term occurring in two OT contexts. It describes, first, a document read by Moses to the people of Israel at Mt Sinai (Ex 24:7), and second, a document discovered in the temple by Hilkiah the priest at the time of King Josiah’s program of repairing the temple (2 Kgs 23:2, 21; 2 Chr 34:30). The term “covenant” refers to the covenant laws that God made with his people Israel in the time of Moses. The Hebrew term “book” means any written document, whether written on clay or stone tablets or on parchment scrolls. Ancient covenants were often in written form. The main problem in understanding the two references to “book of the covenant” is in trying to determine the concepts of those particular documents.<\/p>\n<p>The book read at Mt Sinai has been taken to refer either to the Ten Commandments or to the whole section of Exodus 20 to 23, minus the narrative parts. Since the people responded, “All that the Lord has spoken we will do,” it was evidently legal in its thrust, but it seems impossible to define its contents more precisely than that. The fact that Moses wrote the book (Ex 24:4) need not exclude the Ten Commandments, which are explicitly stated to have been written by God (32:15-16). Moses could also have written them down, perhaps in a preliminary stage (19:25; 20:1).<\/p>\n<p>The content of the “book of the covenant” read by King Josiah to the people of Judah is uncertain. Some scholars have tried to reconstruct its contents on the basis of Josiah’s reforms, concluding that those reforms were similar to principles taught in the book of Deuteronomy. That approach has several weaknesses. First, some of the reforms are nowhere mentioned in the Law (e.g., burning the chariots of the sun—2 Kgs 23:11) and would have to represent inferences Josiah derived from the Law. It becomes unclear how much of his reform was based on explicit passages in the Book of the Covenant and how much on inferences. Second, the account in 2 Chronicles 34:30-33 indicates that much of the reform took place <em>before<\/em> discovery of the Book of the Covenant.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, explicit statements in 2 Kings indicate that some of the reforms were based on the Book of the Covenant. Thus the book must have contained instructions on the Passover (2 Kgs 23:21). It probably dealt with mediums, wizards, and other idolatrous practices, unless that reform was an inference suggested by the wording. In addition, the book evidently contained warnings of the destruction God would bring if his words were not followed (22:16-19). Those expressions probably indicate that Josiah’s Book of the Covenant was larger than Exodus 21–23. In the older book, the Passover is mentioned only as the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Ex 23:15). Exodus 22:18 might possibly give a basis for Josiah’s action against wizards. But in Exodus 21–23 no statement of judgment for disobedience is sufficient to explain the wording of 2 Kings 22:16-19; the closest thing to it is Exodus 23:33.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the fact that Josiah’s Book of the Covenant is also called the Book of the Law (2 Kgs 22:8) suggests that numerous references to the Book of the Law in the OT should also be understood as referring to the Book of the Covenant.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Exodus, Book of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BOOK OF THE COVENANT Term occurring in two OT contexts. It describes, first, a document read by Moses to the people of Israel at Mt Sinai (Ex 24:7), and second, a document discovered in the temple by Hilkiah the priest at the time of King Josiah’s program of repairing the temple (2 Kgs 23:2, 21; 2 Chr 34:30). The term “covenant” refers to the covenant laws that God made with his people Israel in the time of Moses. The Hebrew term “book” means any written document, whether written on clay or s...","summary_en":"BOOK OF THE COVENANT Term occurring in two OT contexts. It describes, first, a document read by Moses to the people of Israel at Mt Sinai (Ex 24:7), and second, a document discovered in the temple by Hilkiah the priest at the time of King Josiah’s program of repairing the temple (2 Kgs 23:2, 21; 2 Chr 34:30). The term “covenant” refers to the covenant laws that God made with his people Israel in the time of Moses. The Hebrew term “book” means any written document, whether written on clay or s...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7869,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covenant","title_en":"Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>COVENANT<\/h3>\n<p>Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the OT is developed from Noah to Abraham and reaches its first climax in the covenant formed between God and Israel at Mt Sinai. After King David’s time, the history of the covenant becomes a less prominent theme.<\/p>\n<p>At a low point in covenant history the Bible introduces the prophet Jeremiah’s prophecy of a “new covenant” in Israel’s future. Christians believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy eventually found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is not accidental that the two volumes of the Christian Bible have been called the Old Covenant and New Covenant (the word commonly translated “testament” means “covenant”).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<p>• The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>• The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningofCovenant\">The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The essence of covenant is to be found in a particular kind of relationship between persons. Mutual obligations characterize that kind of relationship. Thus a covenant relationship is not merely a mutual acquaintance but a commitment to responsibility and action. A key word in Scripture to describe that commitment is “faithfulness,” acted out in a context of abiding friendship.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the word “covenant” was used in an ordinary human sense as well as in a theological sense. An understanding of human covenants provides a starting point for understanding the covenant between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HumanCovenants\">Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>A variety of human relationships, from profoundly personal to distantly political, may be described as covenantal. The deep brotherly love that David and Jonathan shared led to a formal covenant between them (1 Sm 18:3). Their covenant of friendship was more than a token of esteem; it bound them to demonstrate mutual loyalty and loving-kindness in certain tangible ways. Jonathan’s covenant faithfulness was typified on an occasion when David was out of favor with the king; Jonathan braved his father’s wrath to speak favorably for his friend. Subsequently, he warned David secretly to flee into hiding (1 Sm 19–20).<\/p>\n<p>To appreciate the many OT laws on marriage and divorce, one must understand that marriage itself was a covenant relationship (Mal 2:14). The solemn promises exchanged by a man and woman became their covenant obligations. Faithfulness to those promises brought marital blessing (cf. Ps 128; Prv 18:22); violation brought a curse.<\/p>\n<p>An individual could, at least figuratively, make a covenant or vow with himself or herself (something like a New Year’s resolution). Job, arguing his integrity before God, referred to a covenant he had made with his eyes to keep him from looking at women licentiously (Jb 31:1).<\/p>\n<p>Covenants could also have a national or international character. The elders of Israel made a national covenant with King David in Hebron (2 Sm 5:3). Probably it contained explicit promises both from the elders on behalf of the people to submit themselves to the king’s authority and from David to rule the nation justly and according to the law of God (Dt 17:15-20). The covenant relationship described mutual obligations between a senior partner (the king) and junior partners (the Israelites). In international relationships OT covenants were similar to modern treaties or alliances. King Solomon entered into such a covenant with Hiram, king of Tyre; that covenant, like many modern international treaties, was a trade agreement between the two nations (1 Kgs 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is thus an interpersonal framework of trust, responsibilities, and benefits, with broad application to almost every human relationship from personal friendship to international trade agreements. In Scripture covenant is also the most comprehensive concept covering an individual’s relationship to God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Divine-HumanCovenants\">Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>The same basic characteristics of a strictly human covenant are present in a divine covenant: (1) a relationship between two parties (God and a human being or nation), and (2) mutual obligations between the covenant partners. To the OT believer, religion meant covenant. OT religion was faithfulness to the covenant relationship between God and his chosen people; religious responsibilities for both the faith and practice of Israel were covenant responsibilities.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of a divine-human covenant in the OT was not static. Although the fundamental character of covenant remains the same throughout the Bible, the specific nature and form of the covenant changed and developed in the course of ancient Israel’s history. A brief survey of covenant history will further clarify its dimensions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BeginningsoftheCovenantTradition\">Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<h5>Adam<\/h5>\n<p>Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden. God was their Creator; they were his creatures. The meaning of their lives was to be found in relationship with each other and with God, the giver of the Garden. The fall, however, brought a disruption of the divine relationship, and they were expelled from the Garden.<\/p>\n<p>The fall substantially influenced the nature of subsequent religious covenants. The separation of humankind from God clarifies the nature of the human predicament. Created for a relationship with the Creator, sinning humans are excluded from that relationship and cannot, on their own accord, reestablish it. From that circumstance emerges a distinctive feature of divine-human covenants, namely, that God alone can initiate the relationship of covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>Noah<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit mention of covenant in Scripture refers to the initiative taken by God to bind himself again to human beings in a covenant, despite human faithlessness. When God warned Noah to build an ark in order to escape the impending Flood, he also promised to establish a covenant with him (Gn 6:18). The corruption and violence of the human race had provoked God’s anger, but his grace was shown in his dealings with Noah. The promised covenant provided that God would maintain a relationship with one family, even though other divine-human relationships were being formally severed. Significantly, God’s covenant promise to Noah came in a context of demand: God ordered Noah to build an ark (v 14). Noah’s receipt of the covenant blessing depended on his obedience to a divine command.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant was elaborated only after the Flood, when Noah had made an offering to God (Gn 8:20-22). The covenant with Noah was in fact a universal covenant with humankind and all living creatures (9:8-10). God promised never to send such a flood again as judgment on the world. The sign of that covenant was the rainbow.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant with Noah affords some perspective for understanding the “covenant God.” Although human beings may deserve destruction because of their wickedness, God withholds that destruction. The covenant of Noah did not establish an intimate relationship between God and each living being; nevertheless, it left open the possibility of a more intimate covenant. Human beings, in spite of their evil, are allowed for a time to live in God’s world; during those years, they may seek a deeper relationship with that world’s Creator.<\/p>\n<h5>Abraham<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit reference to God’s covenant with Abraham is in Genesis 15. When the Lord called the 75-year-old Abram (as he was first called) to leave his home city of Ur and set out on a journey, a relationship already existed between God and Abram. In that relationship, which enabled God to command Abram’s obedience, God made certain promises to him: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gn 12:2, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Formal establishment of the covenant with Abram is described in Genesis 15 as a profound religious experience. The initiative lay entirely with God, who approached Abram in a vision and spoke with him. Abram raised a fundamental objection: how could he experience the blessing of God if it was to come to him through a son he did not have? His wife Sarai was past the childbearing age, and he himself was “as good as dead” (Rom 4:19). God assured the old man that he would have a son through whom his descendants would eventually be as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abram’s belief at that point introduced the theme of righteousness central to the covenant concept: Abram “believed the <span>Lord<\/span>, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). At the end of that day, Abram knew that his own future and the future of his descendants were firmly in the hands of the covenant God. “On that day the <span>Lord<\/span> made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I give this land’ ” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The covenant is more fully expressed in Genesis 17, which probably records a renewal of God’s covenant with Abram. The initiative once again lay with God (Gn 17:1). God addressed the 99-year-old Abram in words that made clear that the covenant was not a relationship between equal partners. God was the Almighty; Abram was a human being to whom an extraordinary privilege had been granted.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the details of the covenant in Genesis 17 show that both partners assumed responsibilities. God committed himself voluntarily to Abram and his descendants while requiring certain commitments from Abram. The blessing Abram would receive as a covenant partner became clear from the new name God gave him. “I am changing your name. It will no longer be Abram; now you will be known as Abraham, for you will be the father of many nations” (Gn 17:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). God would give to Abraham, through his descendants, the land of Canaan as an everlasting gift and would be the personal God of Abraham and his family in perpetuity (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<p>God’s giving required a response of obedience from Abraham: “Live a blameless life” (Gn 17:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Those simple words indicate the essence of covenant relationship: to relate to God is to live in his presence; since God is holy, one who knows him is expected to live a life of integrity and blamelessness.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant also had a more formal aspect. Abraham and the male members of his household were to undergo the rite of circumcision as a symbol of covenant commitment. Abraham was an old man when he was circumcised (Gn 17:24), though male children born into the covenant family were to be circumcised when they were eight days old (v 12). Circumcision was not in itself a ritual peculiar to the Hebrews; it was practiced in most societies in the ancient Near East (the Philistines were one exception). The distinctiveness lay in what the act symbolized: among other things, a continuing and faithful relationship with the living God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Abraham was characterized by both present and future realities. The covenant established a continuing relationship between Abraham and his Creator. Yet its thrust pointed to future blessing—in the children yet to be born, the “chosen people,” and in the land that eventually his descendants would call their own.<\/p>\n<p>Another dimension of the covenant lay still further in the future: “All the families of the earth will be blessed through you” (Gn 12:3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Early in the OT, the idea of election (God’s unconditional preference; cf. 2 Thes 2:13) is present. God chose to enter into a covenant relationship with a particular man and his particular descendants. Yet God always elects a person to serve: Adam, to cultivate the Garden; Noah, to build an ark; Abraham, to leave his home for another land and to live blamelessly before God (cf. Eph 2:8-10). Further, the “particularity” of Abraham’s election contained within it a universality: through his descendants the blessing of God would be offered to all.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, the future aspects of Abraham’s covenant reflect two stages. From Abraham’s perspective, in the relatively near future his descendants would possess a land given them by God. But in the more distant future was the prospect of a universal blessing, the culmination of God’s work in the world. The initial fulfillment of that distant future is perceived in the NT, but the more immediate fulfillment of God’s promise was the Sinai covenant at the time of Moses.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSinaiCovenant\">The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The covenant established between God and Israel at Mt Sinai is the focal point of the covenant tradition in the OT. It was anticipated in the covenant of Abraham and lay behind the covenant of David and the proclamation of the prophets. It was central to OT religion, laying down the foundations of Judaism that continue into the modern world. The Sinai covenant was the formal institution of a relationship between God and his chosen people, Israel.<\/p>\n<p>In order to appreciate the impact of the Sinai covenant, one must understand its historical context. It was preceded by the exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. The exodus was an extraordinary act of liberation in which God intervened in the normal course of history to free his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus is interpreted in the OT as a divine act comparable to Creation, the act through which God “created” the nation of Israel. Examination of the two versions of the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15) shows that the exodus from Egypt directly parallels the creation of the world as a basis for Sabbath observance. Although Israel was created in the exodus, the nation had neither a constitution nor land. The covenant provided the nascent state of Israel with a constitution, making it a theocratic state (a state ruled by God).<\/p>\n<p>The basic account of the Sinai covenant is contained in Exodus 19 and 20. The initiative came from God, who gave instructions through Moses to prepare for the covenant; God spoke the words that contained the covenant offer. There was no doubt that the God of Israel was the senior partner in the relationship made formal at Sinai. The God who had revealed himself through his acts in the exodus then revealed himself in words. Those two aspects—the God who acts and speaks—are central to OT theology. And although the covenant contained law, it was preceded by the exodus, an act of divine grace.<\/p>\n<p>God’s offer of covenant carried with it a divine promise: “You will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). The promise was one of extraordinary privilege; an entire nation was called upon to represent all other nations before the God of the universe. But the priestly office, though it carried privilege, was also a demanding office. A priest had to be pure and had to know the God whose presence he was required to enter. Thus Israel, the priestly nation, received a law that would provide direction in living, in loving God, and in serving all people. The law given with the covenant expressed the requirements for God’s covenant people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Covenant Law<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant law had two principal parts. First, the Ten Commandments expressed God’s requirements of Israel in a concise form (Ex 20:2-17). The commandments specified the covenant people’s relationship both to God and to other human beings. Although the tendency in the present day is to view the Ten Commandments as a system of ethics or morality, they had a different role in ancient Israel. The covenant law was the foundation or constitution of a new nation, a special “nation of priests.” The head of the nation-state was God. Hence, in ancient Israel the status of the Ten Commandments was approximately that of the code of criminal law in a modern nation-state. To break one of those laws was to commit a crime against God, the head of the state. Yet the laws had a positive purpose. They set down a way of life that would result in a full and rich communion with God and community with others.<\/p>\n<p>The second part of the covenant law was a detailed law code covering the activities of everyday life. Examples of such laws are found in Exodus 21–23. These laws were compiled and recorded in the “Book of the Covenant” (Ex 24:7). Although many laws were contained in this book, it was impossible to codify every aspect of human behavior. The diversity of the examples given indicates that for the covenant member no area of human life was beyond the influence of the covenant. Persons who entered into a relationship with God entered into a relationship that impinged on every possible aspect of their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Renewal<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant at Sinai was made with a particular group of people under the leadership of Moses but was binding on future generations. Consequently, the covenant was renewed from time to time. Covenant renewals are recorded in the time of Joshua (Jos 8:30-35; 24:1-28) and, much later, during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>The most important passage in the Bible for understanding covenant renewal and the nature of covenant is the book of Deuteronomy. The entire book describes a particular covenant renewal ceremony that occurred at a critical juncture in Israel’s early history. The Sinai covenant was renewed just before Moses’ death, before the transition of leadership to Joshua, and before a major military campaign to possess the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant since the time of Abraham had contained a promise of land. Immediately before they entered that land (c. 1250 <span>BC<\/span>), the covenant vows were renewed with a new generation of Israelites, most of whom had not stood at the foot of Mt Sinai some 40 years earlier. Although covenant renewal is the central theme of Deuteronomy, the writer focused primarily on Moses’ sermon rather than on a detailed account of the renewal ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ceremony were simply a repetition of what happened at the original ratification of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were repeated (Dt 5:6-21), and the laws of the Book of the Covenant were expounded in greater detail (Dt 12–26). Two points emerging in Deuteronomy are particularly significant for an understanding of covenant: a clear statement of covenant love and a detailed statement of the blessings and curses that accompanied the making and renewing of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCovenantwithDavid\">The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>The covenant tradition underwent modification during the time of King David (c. 1000 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sinai covenant had been established between God and Israel, with Moses acting as mediator. In David’s time an additional element was added: God entered into a covenant with David as king. That royal covenant was intimated to David through the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:8-16), indicating once again the divine initiative. It was to be an everlasting covenant with David’s royal lineage (23:5).<\/p>\n\n<p>Christians generally interpret the covenant with David as a messianic covenant. For several centuries the dynasty established by David ruled a united Israel, then ruled the remaining southern kingdom of Judah. But in 586 <span>BC<\/span> Judah was conquered by the Babylonians. At that point a descendant of David was no longer ruling an independent kingdom of God’s chosen people. The everlasting nature of the covenant with David was brought out, however, not in the pages of ancient history but in the expectation of a Messiah who would be born of David’s descendants. Matthew and Luke both pointed to Jesus’ Davidic descent (Mt 1:1; Lk 3:31). The NT thus extends the covenant acts of God into the new age in the person of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNewCovenantPredictedintheOldTestament\">The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although David’s covenant with God was eternal, in a sense the covenant established with Israel on Mt Sinai was temporal. The Sinai covenant included conditional clauses, stated in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy. Israel’s disobedience of the covenant law would at worst bring exile from the Promised Land, a central covenant theme from Abraham to Moses and beyond.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew prophets often perceived the danger of an end to the covenant as a result of Israel’s sins. Some of the prophets, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, also perceived a deeper truth; namely, that the covenant was rooted in divine love and that therefore even the curse of God could not be final.<\/p>\n<p>Hosea dramatically expressed that truth through the “living parable” of his marriage (Hos 1–3). He married Gomer at God’s command, but later, as a result of her unfaithfulness, the marital covenant was dissolved by divorce. Although Gomer’s adulterous acts compelled Hosea to divorce her, he did not cease to love her. God later commanded Hosea to go back to Gomer (Hos 3:1). Despite her unfaithfulness, the prophet was to take her again into the covenant relationship of marriage. That acted-out parable depicted God’s actions with Israel. Israel’s sin would inevitably culminate in a divorce from God, but Hosea perceived a new marriage. In the new covenant between God and Israel, Israel would be graciously accepted back into a relationship with God (2:14-18).<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant is given powerful expression in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In his lifetime Jeremiah saw the kingdom of Judah defeated in war. The nation lost its independence and became a vassal of the Babylonian Empire. In an external sense, that defeat in 586 <span>BC<\/span> marked the end of the Sinai covenant. Israel could no longer call the Promised Land its own. Yet Jeremiah perceived a truth beyond the contemporary political realities. God’s work in the world, like his love for the world, was not over.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant that God would bring into effect: “The days are coming, says the <span>Lord<\/span>, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The new covenant would be marked by an act of God within human hearts, a radical spiritual transformation (Jer 31:34). At the Last Supper Jesus declared to his disciples that “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). To the writer of Hebrews, the new covenant was central to a full understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ (Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is a concept central to the message and the history of the OT. The covenant theme continues into the NT as a way of interpreting the Christian gospel. Meaning in human life is to be found in a covenant relationship with the living God. Yet sinful human beings cannot work their way into such a relationship; God alone can initiate it. According to the NT, God’s act in giving his son, Jesus, to die opened up the covenant relationship to all human beings. The forgiveness made available by Jesus’ “blood of the new covenant” makes it possible for any individual to enter into a covenant relationship with God. Entry into such a relationship, today as in Abraham’s time, hinges upon faith (Gal 3:6-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Alliance; Covenant, The New; Law, Biblical Concept of; Oath; Vows.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVENANT<\/h3>\n<p>Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the OT is developed from Noah to Abraham and reaches its first climax in the covenant formed between God and Israel at Mt Sinai. After King David’s time, the history of the covenant becomes a less prominent theme.<\/p>\n<p>At a low point in covenant history the Bible introduces the prophet Jeremiah’s prophecy of a “new covenant” in Israel’s future. Christians believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy eventually found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is not accidental that the two volumes of the Christian Bible have been called the Old Covenant and New Covenant (the word commonly translated “testament” means “covenant”).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<p>• The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>• The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningofCovenant\">The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The essence of covenant is to be found in a particular kind of relationship between persons. Mutual obligations characterize that kind of relationship. Thus a covenant relationship is not merely a mutual acquaintance but a commitment to responsibility and action. A key word in Scripture to describe that commitment is “faithfulness,” acted out in a context of abiding friendship.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the word “covenant” was used in an ordinary human sense as well as in a theological sense. An understanding of human covenants provides a starting point for understanding the covenant between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HumanCovenants\">Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>A variety of human relationships, from profoundly personal to distantly political, may be described as covenantal. The deep brotherly love that David and Jonathan shared led to a formal covenant between them (1 Sm 18:3). Their covenant of friendship was more than a token of esteem; it bound them to demonstrate mutual loyalty and loving-kindness in certain tangible ways. Jonathan’s covenant faithfulness was typified on an occasion when David was out of favor with the king; Jonathan braved his father’s wrath to speak favorably for his friend. Subsequently, he warned David secretly to flee into hiding (1 Sm 19–20).<\/p>\n<p>To appreciate the many OT laws on marriage and divorce, one must understand that marriage itself was a covenant relationship (Mal 2:14). The solemn promises exchanged by a man and woman became their covenant obligations. Faithfulness to those promises brought marital blessing (cf. Ps 128; Prv 18:22); violation brought a curse.<\/p>\n<p>An individual could, at least figuratively, make a covenant or vow with himself or herself (something like a New Year’s resolution). Job, arguing his integrity before God, referred to a covenant he had made with his eyes to keep him from looking at women licentiously (Jb 31:1).<\/p>\n<p>Covenants could also have a national or international character. The elders of Israel made a national covenant with King David in Hebron (2 Sm 5:3). Probably it contained explicit promises both from the elders on behalf of the people to submit themselves to the king’s authority and from David to rule the nation justly and according to the law of God (Dt 17:15-20). The covenant relationship described mutual obligations between a senior partner (the king) and junior partners (the Israelites). In international relationships OT covenants were similar to modern treaties or alliances. King Solomon entered into such a covenant with Hiram, king of Tyre; that covenant, like many modern international treaties, was a trade agreement between the two nations (1 Kgs 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is thus an interpersonal framework of trust, responsibilities, and benefits, with broad application to almost every human relationship from personal friendship to international trade agreements. In Scripture covenant is also the most comprehensive concept covering an individual’s relationship to God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Divine-HumanCovenants\">Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>The same basic characteristics of a strictly human covenant are present in a divine covenant: (1) a relationship between two parties (God and a human being or nation), and (2) mutual obligations between the covenant partners. To the OT believer, religion meant covenant. OT religion was faithfulness to the covenant relationship between God and his chosen people; religious responsibilities for both the faith and practice of Israel were covenant responsibilities.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of a divine-human covenant in the OT was not static. Although the fundamental character of covenant remains the same throughout the Bible, the specific nature and form of the covenant changed and developed in the course of ancient Israel’s history. A brief survey of covenant history will further clarify its dimensions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BeginningsoftheCovenantTradition\">Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<h5>Adam<\/h5>\n<p>Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden. God was their Creator; they were his creatures. The meaning of their lives was to be found in relationship with each other and with God, the giver of the Garden. The fall, however, brought a disruption of the divine relationship, and they were expelled from the Garden.<\/p>\n<p>The fall substantially influenced the nature of subsequent religious covenants. The separation of humankind from God clarifies the nature of the human predicament. Created for a relationship with the Creator, sinning humans are excluded from that relationship and cannot, on their own accord, reestablish it. From that circumstance emerges a distinctive feature of divine-human covenants, namely, that God alone can initiate the relationship of covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>Noah<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit mention of covenant in Scripture refers to the initiative taken by God to bind himself again to human beings in a covenant, despite human faithlessness. When God warned Noah to build an ark in order to escape the impending Flood, he also promised to establish a covenant with him (Gn 6:18). The corruption and violence of the human race had provoked God’s anger, but his grace was shown in his dealings with Noah. The promised covenant provided that God would maintain a relationship with one family, even though other divine-human relationships were being formally severed. Significantly, God’s covenant promise to Noah came in a context of demand: God ordered Noah to build an ark (v 14). Noah’s receipt of the covenant blessing depended on his obedience to a divine command.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant was elaborated only after the Flood, when Noah had made an offering to God (Gn 8:20-22). The covenant with Noah was in fact a universal covenant with humankind and all living creatures (9:8-10). God promised never to send such a flood again as judgment on the world. The sign of that covenant was the rainbow.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant with Noah affords some perspective for understanding the “covenant God.” Although human beings may deserve destruction because of their wickedness, God withholds that destruction. The covenant of Noah did not establish an intimate relationship between God and each living being; nevertheless, it left open the possibility of a more intimate covenant. Human beings, in spite of their evil, are allowed for a time to live in God’s world; during those years, they may seek a deeper relationship with that world’s Creator.<\/p>\n<h5>Abraham<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit reference to God’s covenant with Abraham is in Genesis 15. When the Lord called the 75-year-old Abram (as he was first called) to leave his home city of Ur and set out on a journey, a relationship already existed between God and Abram. In that relationship, which enabled God to command Abram’s obedience, God made certain promises to him: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gn 12:2, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Formal establishment of the covenant with Abram is described in Genesis 15 as a profound religious experience. The initiative lay entirely with God, who approached Abram in a vision and spoke with him. Abram raised a fundamental objection: how could he experience the blessing of God if it was to come to him through a son he did not have? His wife Sarai was past the childbearing age, and he himself was “as good as dead” (Rom 4:19). God assured the old man that he would have a son through whom his descendants would eventually be as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abram’s belief at that point introduced the theme of righteousness central to the covenant concept: Abram “believed the <span>Lord<\/span>, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). At the end of that day, Abram knew that his own future and the future of his descendants were firmly in the hands of the covenant God. “On that day the <span>Lord<\/span> made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I give this land’ ” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The covenant is more fully expressed in Genesis 17, which probably records a renewal of God’s covenant with Abram. The initiative once again lay with God (Gn 17:1). God addressed the 99-year-old Abram in words that made clear that the covenant was not a relationship between equal partners. God was the Almighty; Abram was a human being to whom an extraordinary privilege had been granted.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the details of the covenant in Genesis 17 show that both partners assumed responsibilities. God committed himself voluntarily to Abram and his descendants while requiring certain commitments from Abram. The blessing Abram would receive as a covenant partner became clear from the new name God gave him. “I am changing your name. It will no longer be Abram; now you will be known as Abraham, for you will be the father of many nations” (Gn 17:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). God would give to Abraham, through his descendants, the land of Canaan as an everlasting gift and would be the personal God of Abraham and his family in perpetuity (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<p>God’s giving required a response of obedience from Abraham: “Live a blameless life” (Gn 17:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Those simple words indicate the essence of covenant relationship: to relate to God is to live in his presence; since God is holy, one who knows him is expected to live a life of integrity and blamelessness.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant also had a more formal aspect. Abraham and the male members of his household were to undergo the rite of circumcision as a symbol of covenant commitment. Abraham was an old man when he was circumcised (Gn 17:24), though male children born into the covenant family were to be circumcised when they were eight days old (v 12). Circumcision was not in itself a ritual peculiar to the Hebrews; it was practiced in most societies in the ancient Near East (the Philistines were one exception). The distinctiveness lay in what the act symbolized: among other things, a continuing and faithful relationship with the living God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Abraham was characterized by both present and future realities. The covenant established a continuing relationship between Abraham and his Creator. Yet its thrust pointed to future blessing—in the children yet to be born, the “chosen people,” and in the land that eventually his descendants would call their own.<\/p>\n<p>Another dimension of the covenant lay still further in the future: “All the families of the earth will be blessed through you” (Gn 12:3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Early in the OT, the idea of election (God’s unconditional preference; cf. 2 Thes 2:13) is present. God chose to enter into a covenant relationship with a particular man and his particular descendants. Yet God always elects a person to serve: Adam, to cultivate the Garden; Noah, to build an ark; Abraham, to leave his home for another land and to live blamelessly before God (cf. Eph 2:8-10). Further, the “particularity” of Abraham’s election contained within it a universality: through his descendants the blessing of God would be offered to all.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, the future aspects of Abraham’s covenant reflect two stages. From Abraham’s perspective, in the relatively near future his descendants would possess a land given them by God. But in the more distant future was the prospect of a universal blessing, the culmination of God’s work in the world. The initial fulfillment of that distant future is perceived in the NT, but the more immediate fulfillment of God’s promise was the Sinai covenant at the time of Moses.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSinaiCovenant\">The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The covenant established between God and Israel at Mt Sinai is the focal point of the covenant tradition in the OT. It was anticipated in the covenant of Abraham and lay behind the covenant of David and the proclamation of the prophets. It was central to OT religion, laying down the foundations of Judaism that continue into the modern world. The Sinai covenant was the formal institution of a relationship between God and his chosen people, Israel.<\/p>\n<p>In order to appreciate the impact of the Sinai covenant, one must understand its historical context. It was preceded by the exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. The exodus was an extraordinary act of liberation in which God intervened in the normal course of history to free his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus is interpreted in the OT as a divine act comparable to Creation, the act through which God “created” the nation of Israel. Examination of the two versions of the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15) shows that the exodus from Egypt directly parallels the creation of the world as a basis for Sabbath observance. Although Israel was created in the exodus, the nation had neither a constitution nor land. The covenant provided the nascent state of Israel with a constitution, making it a theocratic state (a state ruled by God).<\/p>\n<p>The basic account of the Sinai covenant is contained in Exodus 19 and 20. The initiative came from God, who gave instructions through Moses to prepare for the covenant; God spoke the words that contained the covenant offer. There was no doubt that the God of Israel was the senior partner in the relationship made formal at Sinai. The God who had revealed himself through his acts in the exodus then revealed himself in words. Those two aspects—the God who acts and speaks—are central to OT theology. And although the covenant contained law, it was preceded by the exodus, an act of divine grace.<\/p>\n<p>God’s offer of covenant carried with it a divine promise: “You will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). The promise was one of extraordinary privilege; an entire nation was called upon to represent all other nations before the God of the universe. But the priestly office, though it carried privilege, was also a demanding office. A priest had to be pure and had to know the God whose presence he was required to enter. Thus Israel, the priestly nation, received a law that would provide direction in living, in loving God, and in serving all people. The law given with the covenant expressed the requirements for God’s covenant people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Covenant Law<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant law had two principal parts. First, the Ten Commandments expressed God’s requirements of Israel in a concise form (Ex 20:2-17). The commandments specified the covenant people’s relationship both to God and to other human beings. Although the tendency in the present day is to view the Ten Commandments as a system of ethics or morality, they had a different role in ancient Israel. The covenant law was the foundation or constitution of a new nation, a special “nation of priests.” The head of the nation-state was God. Hence, in ancient Israel the status of the Ten Commandments was approximately that of the code of criminal law in a modern nation-state. To break one of those laws was to commit a crime against God, the head of the state. Yet the laws had a positive purpose. They set down a way of life that would result in a full and rich communion with God and community with others.<\/p>\n<p>The second part of the covenant law was a detailed law code covering the activities of everyday life. Examples of such laws are found in Exodus 21–23. These laws were compiled and recorded in the “Book of the Covenant” (Ex 24:7). Although many laws were contained in this book, it was impossible to codify every aspect of human behavior. The diversity of the examples given indicates that for the covenant member no area of human life was beyond the influence of the covenant. Persons who entered into a relationship with God entered into a relationship that impinged on every possible aspect of their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Renewal<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant at Sinai was made with a particular group of people under the leadership of Moses but was binding on future generations. Consequently, the covenant was renewed from time to time. Covenant renewals are recorded in the time of Joshua (Jos 8:30-35; 24:1-28) and, much later, during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>The most important passage in the Bible for understanding covenant renewal and the nature of covenant is the book of Deuteronomy. The entire book describes a particular covenant renewal ceremony that occurred at a critical juncture in Israel’s early history. The Sinai covenant was renewed just before Moses’ death, before the transition of leadership to Joshua, and before a major military campaign to possess the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant since the time of Abraham had contained a promise of land. Immediately before they entered that land (c. 1250 <span>BC<\/span>), the covenant vows were renewed with a new generation of Israelites, most of whom had not stood at the foot of Mt Sinai some 40 years earlier. Although covenant renewal is the central theme of Deuteronomy, the writer focused primarily on Moses’ sermon rather than on a detailed account of the renewal ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ceremony were simply a repetition of what happened at the original ratification of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were repeated (Dt 5:6-21), and the laws of the Book of the Covenant were expounded in greater detail (Dt 12–26). Two points emerging in Deuteronomy are particularly significant for an understanding of covenant: a clear statement of covenant love and a detailed statement of the blessings and curses that accompanied the making and renewing of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCovenantwithDavid\">The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>The covenant tradition underwent modification during the time of King David (c. 1000 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sinai covenant had been established between God and Israel, with Moses acting as mediator. In David’s time an additional element was added: God entered into a covenant with David as king. That royal covenant was intimated to David through the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:8-16), indicating once again the divine initiative. It was to be an everlasting covenant with David’s royal lineage (23:5).<\/p>\n\n<p>Christians generally interpret the covenant with David as a messianic covenant. For several centuries the dynasty established by David ruled a united Israel, then ruled the remaining southern kingdom of Judah. But in 586 <span>BC<\/span> Judah was conquered by the Babylonians. At that point a descendant of David was no longer ruling an independent kingdom of God’s chosen people. The everlasting nature of the covenant with David was brought out, however, not in the pages of ancient history but in the expectation of a Messiah who would be born of David’s descendants. Matthew and Luke both pointed to Jesus’ Davidic descent (Mt 1:1; Lk 3:31). The NT thus extends the covenant acts of God into the new age in the person of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNewCovenantPredictedintheOldTestament\">The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although David’s covenant with God was eternal, in a sense the covenant established with Israel on Mt Sinai was temporal. The Sinai covenant included conditional clauses, stated in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy. Israel’s disobedience of the covenant law would at worst bring exile from the Promised Land, a central covenant theme from Abraham to Moses and beyond.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew prophets often perceived the danger of an end to the covenant as a result of Israel’s sins. Some of the prophets, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, also perceived a deeper truth; namely, that the covenant was rooted in divine love and that therefore even the curse of God could not be final.<\/p>\n<p>Hosea dramatically expressed that truth through the “living parable” of his marriage (Hos 1–3). He married Gomer at God’s command, but later, as a result of her unfaithfulness, the marital covenant was dissolved by divorce. Although Gomer’s adulterous acts compelled Hosea to divorce her, he did not cease to love her. God later commanded Hosea to go back to Gomer (Hos 3:1). Despite her unfaithfulness, the prophet was to take her again into the covenant relationship of marriage. That acted-out parable depicted God’s actions with Israel. Israel’s sin would inevitably culminate in a divorce from God, but Hosea perceived a new marriage. In the new covenant between God and Israel, Israel would be graciously accepted back into a relationship with God (2:14-18).<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant is given powerful expression in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In his lifetime Jeremiah saw the kingdom of Judah defeated in war. The nation lost its independence and became a vassal of the Babylonian Empire. In an external sense, that defeat in 586 <span>BC<\/span> marked the end of the Sinai covenant. Israel could no longer call the Promised Land its own. Yet Jeremiah perceived a truth beyond the contemporary political realities. God’s work in the world, like his love for the world, was not over.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant that God would bring into effect: “The days are coming, says the <span>Lord<\/span>, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The new covenant would be marked by an act of God within human hearts, a radical spiritual transformation (Jer 31:34). At the Last Supper Jesus declared to his disciples that “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). To the writer of Hebrews, the new covenant was central to a full understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ (Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is a concept central to the message and the history of the OT. The covenant theme continues into the NT as a way of interpreting the Christian gospel. Meaning in human life is to be found in a covenant relationship with the living God. Yet sinful human beings cannot work their way into such a relationship; God alone can initiate it. According to the NT, God’s act in giving his son, Jesus, to die opened up the covenant relationship to all human beings. The forgiveness made available by Jesus’ “blood of the new covenant” makes it possible for any individual to enter into a covenant relationship with God. Entry into such a relationship, today as in Abraham’s time, hinges upon faith (Gal 3:6-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Alliance; Covenant, The New; Law, Biblical Concept of; Oath; Vows.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVENANT Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings. The covenant theme in the OT is developed from...","summary_en":"COVENANT Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings. The covenant theme in the OT is developed from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9441,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Deuteronomy","title_en":"Book of Deuteronomy","content_ro":"<h3>DEUTERONOMY, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for the nation of Israel. Moses’ reminders of the wilderness wanderings and the Ten Commandments, plus his instructions for life in the Promised Land, are a vital part of the OT covenant literature.<\/p>\n\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>• Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>• Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandAuthorship\">Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>Two basic views (with variations) on the date and authorship of Deuteronomy are advocated by modern biblical scholars. Those who consider Moses the author date the book in the 14th or 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. Others believe that it was composed by an unknown author in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>, when Josiah was king in the southern kingdom of Judah.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for a Seventh-Century Date<\/h5>\n<p>As early as 1805, W. M. L. de Wette advocated that Deuteronomy was used by Josiah in his seventh-century reforms, and that it was written shortly before that. Biblical critic Julius Wellhausen adopted that view, which has been advocated by many scholars ever since S. R. Driver publicized it in his <em>Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament<\/em> (1891). According to that view, the book was written late but ascribed to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>Many modern scholars, such as Gerhard von Rad and G. E. Wright, regard Moses as the founder of Israel’s faith. They argue that whatever in Deuteronomy is from Moses was transmitted orally until about the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. Denying that Moses actually wrote Deuteronomy, they attribute its present form to numerous writers and editors over an extended period of centuries.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for Mosaic Authorship<\/h5>\n<p>In recent decades, studies of Hittite suzerainty treaties from the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> have yielded interesting comparisons between those treaty forms and the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. In 1954 G. Mendenhall suggested that the form of the covenant at Mt Sinai was the same literary form used by Hittites in treaties with Syrian vassal states during the 14th and 13th centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In 1960 M. G. Kline applied that idea to the book of Deuteronomy, seeing it as a renewal of the Sinaitic covenant and outlining its structure as a literary unit reflecting the pattern of Hittite covenant forms.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy does contain certain parallels to Hittite vassal treaties. As a renewal treaty it appeals to the covenant of God with Israel at Mt Sinai, recorded in the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>1. The “preamble” in ancient Hittite treaties usually identified the suzerain or ruler. In Deuteronomy 1:1-5 (Ex 20:1) Moses as the speaker represents God, the King of Israel. As his death approaches, Moses makes an appeal for the renewal of the covenant.<\/p>\n<li>2. In the “historical prologue” the suzerain usually cited the benefits he had bestowed on his vassal. In Deuteronomy 1:6–4:49 (Ex 20:2) Moses declares what God has done for Israel since his revelation at Mt Sinai. Moses reminds the people of Israel of God’s faithfulness even when they had been unfaithful.<\/li>\n<li>3. The “stipulations” were usually stated by the suzerain in the treaty’s third division. In Deuteronomy 5–26 Moses outlines the stipulations for Israel in their covenant relationship to God. The basic requirement in Deuteronomy 5–11 (Ex 20:3-17) is exclusive, wholehearted love for God. In the following chapters, Deuteronomy 12–26, the basic principle of exclusive love for God is applied to specific areas of culticceremonial consecration (Dt 12:1–16:17), judicial justice in government (16:18–21:23), the sanctity of God’s order (chs 22–25), and public acknowledgment of God as their Redeemer and King (ch 26).<\/li>\n<li>4. “Covenant ratification” usually contained a provision for treaty renewal and a formula for curses and blessings. In Deuteronomy 27 provision is made for Joshua to conclude the renewal of the covenant after the Israelites occupy the land. In addition, the divine threat and promise are expressed in blessings and curses as Israel swears its oath of allegiance on the plains of Moab.<\/li>\n<li>5. “Succession arrangements” were usually the concluding part of suzerainty-vassal treaties. In chapters 31–34 Joshua is designated as Moses’ successor. The written text is deposited in the sanctuary with the song of witness and a testamentary blessing by Moses. The book of Deuteronomy thus constitutes the documentary witness of God’s covenant as it concludes with the death of Moses.<\/li>\n<p>The fact that the literary structure of Deuteronomy parallels the legal forms characteristic of ancient Hittite treaties supports the traditional viewpoint that Moses is the author of Deuteronomy. When Moses is recognized as the mediator between God and Israel in the Sinaitic covenant, it is significant that the book of Deuteronomy represents Moses’ renewal of the covenant in the literary form current in the culture of his day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalSetting\">Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>Moses led the Israelites from Egypt through the wilderness to the plains of Moab east of the Dead Sea. Exodus 1–19 gives an account of the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt, the birth and preparation of Moses, his contest with the pharaoh, the miraculous deliverance out of Egypt, and the journey to Mt Sinai (probably also known as Mt Horeb).<\/p>\n<p>In that desert area God’s great revelation came to Israel through Moses (Ex 20–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 1–9). At Mt Sinai, God identified himself as the one who had delivered the Israelites. There he established an agreement by which they would be exclusively devoted to him as his holy nation. There the tabernacle was built and the priesthood established. Instructions were given for making sacrifices and offerings, and for observing feasts and seasons, so that Israel’s pattern of living would show that they were God’s holy people. The tribes were also organized for encampment around the tabernacle and for the march to Canaan, the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 10–21 is an account of the 38 years the Israelites spent in the wilderness. In 11 days they marched from Mt Horeb to Kadesh-barnea, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Beersheba. From there 12 spies were sent into Canaan. Their report produced a crisis in the form of a revolt against God. Subsequently, Israel wandered in the wilderness for 38 years, during which those who had been at least 20 years old when they left Egypt died. The new generation moved to the plains of Moab, located east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. Numbers 20–36 tells of the conquest and occupation of the land east of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy presents Moses’ address to the new generation of Israelites. In Exodus and Numbers God frequently speaks to Moses; in Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking at God’s command to the Israelites (Dt 1:1-4; 5:1; 29:1). In contrast to the preceding books, Deuteronomy has a style of exhortation in which Moses admonishes the new generation about their responsibility in view of the preceding generation’s failures. Whatever repetition occurs in Deuteronomy is carefully selected, with the specific purpose of warning the new generation so that they will not fail to conquer and occupy Canaan. Deuteronomy is not primarily retrospective; its outlook is optimistic about the future, offering hope for fulfilling the promises God made to the Israelites in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificanceofDeuteronomy\">Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>Deuteronomy (with Genesis, Psalms, and Isaiah) is among the most frequently quoted books in the early Christian centuries. More than 80 OT quotations in the NT come from Deuteronomy.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus focused attention on Deuteronomy when he summarized the essence of the entire OT Law and Prophets in the two great commandments of love for God and neighbor (Mt 22:37; see Dt 6:5; 10:19). Jesus also quoted Deuteronomy (6:13, 16; 8:3) in his temptation experience (Mt 4:4-10). Deuteronomy unfolds the essence of what God revealed to Moses at Mt Sinai. In Deuteronomy, Moses shares with the Israelites the core of God’s revelation without repeating details of sacrifices, observances, or rituals. He expounds the character of Israel’s faith and nationhood. Moses repeatedly emphasizes his concern that they faithfully maintain a good relationship with God. An exclusive devotion to God expressed in everyday life is the key to a lifetime of blessing.<\/p>\n<p>The primary need of love toward God and neighbor eventually became a basic requirement for the followers of Jesus Christ (Lk 10:25-28). The book of Deuteronomy is thus crucially important to the Christian concern to maintain a vital relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeuteronomyandtheLaw\">Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>To designate the book of Deuteronomy as a “second law” or a repetition of the law is misleading. Moses’ emphasis is not legalistic. Details of worship and ritual are not repeated or delineated to any great extent. Although the Ten Commandments are repeated, emphasis is placed on the first commandment, explicitly requiring exclusive devotion to God. Moses is primarily concerned with Israel’s relationship with God and their determination to maintain it in their own and their children’s lives.<\/p>\n<p>The NT reveals that a legalistic interpretation of the Mosaic revelation was held by the Jews of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Such legalism developed in Judaism especially during the intertestamental era. The Judaistic legalism of NT times has in modern times been ascribed wrongly to Moses. Moses did warn of the necessity of keeping all of God’s law (Dt 28:1, 58), but in Deuteronomy his message as a whole makes it clear that he was not exclusively concerned about legalistic observance. Rather, the central theme of Deuteronomy is the unique relationship that had been established by a unique God with a unique people, the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Brief Historical Review (1:1–4:43)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses is identified as the speaker, addressing the Israelites on the plains of Moab during the last year of his life. The Israelites were on the verge of entering the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>Moses began with a reference to Mt Sinai, scene of the greatest revelation in OT times. He focused attention on God’s explicit command for them to move up to Canaan and occupy the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Their rebellion brought divine judgment, so the conquest of Canaan had been delayed 38 years while an entire disobedient generation died in the wilderness.<\/p>\n<p>Instructed by God not to molest the Edomites or Moabites, Moses had led the Israelites to the Moab plains north of the Arnon River. The Israelites defeated Sihon, the Amorite king of Heshbon, and Og, king of Bashan. The tribes of Reuben and Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh appropriated the territory east of the Jordan River as their land (Nm 32). On the basis of that conquest, Moses encouraged Joshua to believe that God would aid him and the Israelites in the conquest of the land of Canaan west of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should learn from the mistakes of the generation that died in the wilderness (Dt 4:1-40). They should consider the fact that the word of God had been spoken to them. The revelation that had come to them through Moses was unique, and the most important thing was for them to revere the God who had revealed himself. The uniqueness of Israel’s God among the nations that worship idols should never be forgotten.<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the Israelites that they had entered into a contractual agreement with their unique God. That covenant was mentioned 26 more times by Moses. No nation had ever experienced anything like it. If Israel obeyed, they would enjoy God’s blessing and favor.<\/p>\n<h5>Exhortations and Applications (4:44–26:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The circumstances in which Moses addressed the Israelites are reported in a short transitional passage (Dt 4:44-49). From the slopes of Mt Pisgah (or Nebo), with Israel encamped in the valley opposite Beth-peor, Moses made his appeal to the people before they crossed the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ exposition of the “great commandment” is centered in the agreement made between God and Israel. He repeated the Ten Commandments as the essence of God’s revelation at Sinai. As Moses explained what God expected of Israel, he elaborated the first commandment: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (5:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). Their relationship with God was of basic importance, since God’s wrath will be against those who worship other gods (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Love is the key word in the relationship between God and Israel. Moses boldly asserted, “Hear, O Israel! The <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, the <span>Lord<\/span> alone. And you must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Dt 6:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>). All other commandments are significant because they bear on that relationship (as spelled out in chs 5–11).<\/p>\n<p>Exclusive love and devotion to God are essential. In a relationship of wholehearted love, no idols can be recognized or tolerated. Yet Moses wanted Israel to convey its consciousness of God to future generations by many external things: signs on their hands, frontlets (or “phylacteries”) on their foreheads, Scripture verses on their doorposts, and so on. By precept and example they should convey to their children that they love God (Dt 6).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should never forget that God had chosen them to be his people (Dt 7). They were to execute God’s judgment on the Canaanites, who had been spared judgment since Abraham’s time (Gn 15:16). Although the Israelites themselves did not merit God’s love, in love and mercy he had redeemed them out of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Moses appealed to the people to remember what God had done for them (Dt 8). To God’s sustaining provisions they should respond with thankfulness, recognizing that the power to achieve anything they had done had been God’s gift.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had repeatedly failed in their faith and commitment to God (9:1–10:11). Through Moses’ intercession they had been spared. It was for no merit of their own that they would enter Canaan; that was God’s gracious provision for them. Moses’ appeal for a wholehearted commitment is summarized in Deuteronomy 10:12–11:32. It is necessary to display reverence, respect, love, and obedience to God (see also 6:5, 13, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The God whom the Israelites must love sincerely and without reservation is the Lord of the cosmos. He is the righteous judge who rules supreme over all nature and history. God loved their forefathers, the patriarchs. He redeemed the Israelites from Egyptian enslavement and gave them his covenant. He manifested himself in helping the orphans, widows, and strangers. He multiplied Israel to be as numerous as the stars of the heavens.<\/p>\n<p>Moses gave two basic instructions to apply in daily life to maintain their relationship with God as a reality: “circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart” (Dt 10:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). He did not refer to physical circumcision, a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gn 17). Circumcision, which was not observed during the years of wilderness wanderings, was reinstituted under Joshua after the Israelites crossed the Jordan River (Jos 5:2-9). Moses referred to “spiritual circumcision” (see Lv 26:40-41; Jer 4:4; 9:25; Rom 2:29). All things that might restrict, interfere with, or negate total devotion to God were to be cut away (circumcised) so that the Israelites would continue to love God with all their heart.<\/p>\n<p>“Love the foreigner” (Dt 10:19) ranks second in importance to wholehearted love for God. Love for the stranger or neighbor is basic to all other human obligations (see Lv 19:9-18). Social obligations issue out of a person’s relationship with God. Being recipients of God’s love, the Israelites were to love others. They were to remember God’s love for them when they were slaves and strangers in Egypt. God loves the stranger, the widow, and the orphan; therefore, if anyone loves God, he or she is under obligation to love other people. God is concerned about justice and righteousness; a person who professes to love God must be concerned about just treatment for other people.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites were to be known for their concern for people whose social position exposed them to exploitation and oppression. The profound humanitarian spirit of the Mosaic law stands in unique contrast to the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian and Hittite law codes of that day. In those codes human relationships reflected no vital consciousness of a love relationship with deity.<\/p>\n<p>In the first century <span>AD<\/span> Jesus Christ came into conflict with Jewish religious leaders who had lost the essence of God’s law in a maze of legalism. For Jesus, the greatest commandment was to love God; the second was to love one’s neighbor. Those two commandments (which constitute the essence of the entire OT revelation) would, if kept perfectly, provide the basis for eternal life (Mt 22:37-39; Mk 12:29-31; Lk 10:27-28). Christians believe that the climax of God’s revelation of love came in Jesus Christ. For them, responding to God’s love means to accept Jesus Christ in wholehearted devotion and to love one’s neighbor as Jesus exemplified in his life.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 12:1–26:19, Moses gave instruction in practical living for a God-related people when they resided in the land God had promised to them. Having once survived on manna supplied directly by God, in Canaan they would enjoy the fruit and produce of the land. They would also encounter a culture permeated by Canaanite religion.<\/p>\n<p>In worshiping God in their new setting, they were cautioned to maintain due sanctity (Dt 12:1–14:21). They were not to worship at pagan shrines. They should bring their offerings to divinely appointed places for fellowship and rejoicing together in the Lord’s presence. Idolatry was not to be tolerated in any form. Any prophet who deviated from the law of Moses in advising the worship of other gods should be stoned. Exclusive devotion to God was to be daily practice.<\/p>\n<p>Canaan’s abundant blessings should be shared with neighbors (14:22–15:23). Tithes should be brought to the central sanctuary where Levites assisted the priests in religious ministration. Joy in sharing life’s blessings and opportunities was to characterize Israel’s pattern of living.<\/p>\n<p>Moses prescribed three annual pilgrimages (16:1-17). The people should remember their deliverance out of Egypt by observing the feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread. Seven weeks later, when the barley harvest was completed, they should spend time rejoicing before the Lord in a one-day festival called the Feast of Weeks. When the vintage as well as the grain harvest was completed, they were to observe the Feast of Ingathering (or Booths), a time of thanksgiving and sharing with others. Every seven years the law was read at the Feast of Ingathering.<\/p>\n<p>In human relations justice was to prevail among the Israelites (16:18–21:23). The Book of the Law kept at the main sanctuary was their divine authority, providing God’s instructions for them. The king was to have a copy of this law and govern his life in accordance with it. Prophets and priests played an important role as religious leaders in the life of Israel. Judicial authority was vested in the priests. In contrast to the brutality of other nations, humanitarian principles were to prevail in Israel’s warfare. Fathers were responsible for their own family households.<\/p>\n<p>In domestic and social relationships, the law of love was to prevail (22:1–26:19). Many regulations governed family life. In matters of sustenance, wages, and business dealings, the Israelites were admonished to be compassionate and just. Promises and warnings raised their consciousness about using the resources of land and animals entrusted to them so that their stewardship would please God.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 26, Moses instructed the Israelites in two liturgical confessions and a reaffirmation of the covenant. By acknowledging that God was the giver of all they had, and by confessing before God that they shared his gifts with others, they confirmed their covenant with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Alternatives: Blessings or Curses (27:1–30:20)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses set before the Israelites the alternatives of blessings or curses. Under Joshua they were to renew the covenant publicly. At Mt Ebal stones were to be erected for inscribing the law and an altar constructed for offering sacrifice. The curses were to be read from Mt Ebal and the blessings from Mt Gerizim. Conditional self-curses were read regarding offenses against God and other human beings (Dt 27:15-26). Thus they acknowledged their accountability to God. Though their sins might be hidden from people, it was God to whom they were primarily and ultimately accountable. Blessings as a way of life and curses as a way of death were clearly set before the Israelites (ch 28). Setting them in the perspective of history, Moses appealed to the new generation to take advantage of their present opportunity (ch 29). Warning that, should they fail to love God, they would ultimately be subjected to dispersion, Moses admonished them to choose the way of life and good rather than the way of death and evil (ch 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Transition: from Moses to Joshua (31:1–34:12)<\/h5>\n<p>When the life and ministry of Moses were nearing completion, and transfer of leadership was near (Dt 31:1–34:12), Joshua had already been designated by God as Israel’s new leader. Moses assured the Israelites that God would be the same with Joshua in charge. The revelation given through Moses had been put in writing and now was committed to the priests, the custodians of the Book of the Law. Joshua, who had already distinguished himself in responsible leadership, was publicly confirmed at the door of the tabernacle (31:1-29).<\/p>\n<p>The “Song of Moses” is the covenant’s document of witness (32:1-47). In it Moses spoke with prophetic understanding as he recounted Israel’s past experience. Reiterating the consequences of their attitude toward God, he assured the people of restoration if they failed again. He encouraged them to fix their hearts on what God had revealed to them and to impress it on their children. Keeping the covenant by maintaining a wholehearted love for God would be important for all future generations as well as for those then listening to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>After some final, brief instructions (32:48-52), Moses pronounced his blessings on the Israelites, whom he had led for 40 years (33:1-29). In his final blessing, also called the “Testament of Moses,” the greatness of God and his special relationship with Israel are delineated. Israel is unique among all the nations of the world.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy appropriately ends with an account of the death of Moses, the greatest prophet in OT times (34:1-12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Moses.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEUTERONOMY, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for the nation of Israel. Moses’ reminders of the wilderness wanderings and the Ten Commandments, plus his instructions for life in the Promised Land, are a vital part of the OT covenant literature.<\/p>\n\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>• Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>• Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandAuthorship\">Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>Two basic views (with variations) on the date and authorship of Deuteronomy are advocated by modern biblical scholars. Those who consider Moses the author date the book in the 14th or 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. Others believe that it was composed by an unknown author in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>, when Josiah was king in the southern kingdom of Judah.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for a Seventh-Century Date<\/h5>\n<p>As early as 1805, W. M. L. de Wette advocated that Deuteronomy was used by Josiah in his seventh-century reforms, and that it was written shortly before that. Biblical critic Julius Wellhausen adopted that view, which has been advocated by many scholars ever since S. R. Driver publicized it in his <em>Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament<\/em> (1891). According to that view, the book was written late but ascribed to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>Many modern scholars, such as Gerhard von Rad and G. E. Wright, regard Moses as the founder of Israel’s faith. They argue that whatever in Deuteronomy is from Moses was transmitted orally until about the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. Denying that Moses actually wrote Deuteronomy, they attribute its present form to numerous writers and editors over an extended period of centuries.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for Mosaic Authorship<\/h5>\n<p>In recent decades, studies of Hittite suzerainty treaties from the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> have yielded interesting comparisons between those treaty forms and the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. In 1954 G. Mendenhall suggested that the form of the covenant at Mt Sinai was the same literary form used by Hittites in treaties with Syrian vassal states during the 14th and 13th centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In 1960 M. G. Kline applied that idea to the book of Deuteronomy, seeing it as a renewal of the Sinaitic covenant and outlining its structure as a literary unit reflecting the pattern of Hittite covenant forms.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy does contain certain parallels to Hittite vassal treaties. As a renewal treaty it appeals to the covenant of God with Israel at Mt Sinai, recorded in the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>1. The “preamble” in ancient Hittite treaties usually identified the suzerain or ruler. In Deuteronomy 1:1-5 (Ex 20:1) Moses as the speaker represents God, the King of Israel. As his death approaches, Moses makes an appeal for the renewal of the covenant.<\/p>\n<li>2. In the “historical prologue” the suzerain usually cited the benefits he had bestowed on his vassal. In Deuteronomy 1:6–4:49 (Ex 20:2) Moses declares what God has done for Israel since his revelation at Mt Sinai. Moses reminds the people of Israel of God’s faithfulness even when they had been unfaithful.<\/li>\n<li>3. The “stipulations” were usually stated by the suzerain in the treaty’s third division. In Deuteronomy 5–26 Moses outlines the stipulations for Israel in their covenant relationship to God. The basic requirement in Deuteronomy 5–11 (Ex 20:3-17) is exclusive, wholehearted love for God. In the following chapters, Deuteronomy 12–26, the basic principle of exclusive love for God is applied to specific areas of culticceremonial consecration (Dt 12:1–16:17), judicial justice in government (16:18–21:23), the sanctity of God’s order (chs 22–25), and public acknowledgment of God as their Redeemer and King (ch 26).<\/li>\n<li>4. “Covenant ratification” usually contained a provision for treaty renewal and a formula for curses and blessings. In Deuteronomy 27 provision is made for Joshua to conclude the renewal of the covenant after the Israelites occupy the land. In addition, the divine threat and promise are expressed in blessings and curses as Israel swears its oath of allegiance on the plains of Moab.<\/li>\n<li>5. “Succession arrangements” were usually the concluding part of suzerainty-vassal treaties. In chapters 31–34 Joshua is designated as Moses’ successor. The written text is deposited in the sanctuary with the song of witness and a testamentary blessing by Moses. The book of Deuteronomy thus constitutes the documentary witness of God’s covenant as it concludes with the death of Moses.<\/li>\n<p>The fact that the literary structure of Deuteronomy parallels the legal forms characteristic of ancient Hittite treaties supports the traditional viewpoint that Moses is the author of Deuteronomy. When Moses is recognized as the mediator between God and Israel in the Sinaitic covenant, it is significant that the book of Deuteronomy represents Moses’ renewal of the covenant in the literary form current in the culture of his day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalSetting\">Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>Moses led the Israelites from Egypt through the wilderness to the plains of Moab east of the Dead Sea. Exodus 1–19 gives an account of the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt, the birth and preparation of Moses, his contest with the pharaoh, the miraculous deliverance out of Egypt, and the journey to Mt Sinai (probably also known as Mt Horeb).<\/p>\n<p>In that desert area God’s great revelation came to Israel through Moses (Ex 20–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 1–9). At Mt Sinai, God identified himself as the one who had delivered the Israelites. There he established an agreement by which they would be exclusively devoted to him as his holy nation. There the tabernacle was built and the priesthood established. Instructions were given for making sacrifices and offerings, and for observing feasts and seasons, so that Israel’s pattern of living would show that they were God’s holy people. The tribes were also organized for encampment around the tabernacle and for the march to Canaan, the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 10–21 is an account of the 38 years the Israelites spent in the wilderness. In 11 days they marched from Mt Horeb to Kadesh-barnea, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Beersheba. From there 12 spies were sent into Canaan. Their report produced a crisis in the form of a revolt against God. Subsequently, Israel wandered in the wilderness for 38 years, during which those who had been at least 20 years old when they left Egypt died. The new generation moved to the plains of Moab, located east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. Numbers 20–36 tells of the conquest and occupation of the land east of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy presents Moses’ address to the new generation of Israelites. In Exodus and Numbers God frequently speaks to Moses; in Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking at God’s command to the Israelites (Dt 1:1-4; 5:1; 29:1). In contrast to the preceding books, Deuteronomy has a style of exhortation in which Moses admonishes the new generation about their responsibility in view of the preceding generation’s failures. Whatever repetition occurs in Deuteronomy is carefully selected, with the specific purpose of warning the new generation so that they will not fail to conquer and occupy Canaan. Deuteronomy is not primarily retrospective; its outlook is optimistic about the future, offering hope for fulfilling the promises God made to the Israelites in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificanceofDeuteronomy\">Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>Deuteronomy (with Genesis, Psalms, and Isaiah) is among the most frequently quoted books in the early Christian centuries. More than 80 OT quotations in the NT come from Deuteronomy.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus focused attention on Deuteronomy when he summarized the essence of the entire OT Law and Prophets in the two great commandments of love for God and neighbor (Mt 22:37; see Dt 6:5; 10:19). Jesus also quoted Deuteronomy (6:13, 16; 8:3) in his temptation experience (Mt 4:4-10). Deuteronomy unfolds the essence of what God revealed to Moses at Mt Sinai. In Deuteronomy, Moses shares with the Israelites the core of God’s revelation without repeating details of sacrifices, observances, or rituals. He expounds the character of Israel’s faith and nationhood. Moses repeatedly emphasizes his concern that they faithfully maintain a good relationship with God. An exclusive devotion to God expressed in everyday life is the key to a lifetime of blessing.<\/p>\n<p>The primary need of love toward God and neighbor eventually became a basic requirement for the followers of Jesus Christ (Lk 10:25-28). The book of Deuteronomy is thus crucially important to the Christian concern to maintain a vital relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeuteronomyandtheLaw\">Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>To designate the book of Deuteronomy as a “second law” or a repetition of the law is misleading. Moses’ emphasis is not legalistic. Details of worship and ritual are not repeated or delineated to any great extent. Although the Ten Commandments are repeated, emphasis is placed on the first commandment, explicitly requiring exclusive devotion to God. Moses is primarily concerned with Israel’s relationship with God and their determination to maintain it in their own and their children’s lives.<\/p>\n<p>The NT reveals that a legalistic interpretation of the Mosaic revelation was held by the Jews of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Such legalism developed in Judaism especially during the intertestamental era. The Judaistic legalism of NT times has in modern times been ascribed wrongly to Moses. Moses did warn of the necessity of keeping all of God’s law (Dt 28:1, 58), but in Deuteronomy his message as a whole makes it clear that he was not exclusively concerned about legalistic observance. Rather, the central theme of Deuteronomy is the unique relationship that had been established by a unique God with a unique people, the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Brief Historical Review (1:1–4:43)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses is identified as the speaker, addressing the Israelites on the plains of Moab during the last year of his life. The Israelites were on the verge of entering the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>Moses began with a reference to Mt Sinai, scene of the greatest revelation in OT times. He focused attention on God’s explicit command for them to move up to Canaan and occupy the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Their rebellion brought divine judgment, so the conquest of Canaan had been delayed 38 years while an entire disobedient generation died in the wilderness.<\/p>\n<p>Instructed by God not to molest the Edomites or Moabites, Moses had led the Israelites to the Moab plains north of the Arnon River. The Israelites defeated Sihon, the Amorite king of Heshbon, and Og, king of Bashan. The tribes of Reuben and Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh appropriated the territory east of the Jordan River as their land (Nm 32). On the basis of that conquest, Moses encouraged Joshua to believe that God would aid him and the Israelites in the conquest of the land of Canaan west of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should learn from the mistakes of the generation that died in the wilderness (Dt 4:1-40). They should consider the fact that the word of God had been spoken to them. The revelation that had come to them through Moses was unique, and the most important thing was for them to revere the God who had revealed himself. The uniqueness of Israel’s God among the nations that worship idols should never be forgotten.<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the Israelites that they had entered into a contractual agreement with their unique God. That covenant was mentioned 26 more times by Moses. No nation had ever experienced anything like it. If Israel obeyed, they would enjoy God’s blessing and favor.<\/p>\n<h5>Exhortations and Applications (4:44–26:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The circumstances in which Moses addressed the Israelites are reported in a short transitional passage (Dt 4:44-49). From the slopes of Mt Pisgah (or Nebo), with Israel encamped in the valley opposite Beth-peor, Moses made his appeal to the people before they crossed the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ exposition of the “great commandment” is centered in the agreement made between God and Israel. He repeated the Ten Commandments as the essence of God’s revelation at Sinai. As Moses explained what God expected of Israel, he elaborated the first commandment: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (5:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). Their relationship with God was of basic importance, since God’s wrath will be against those who worship other gods (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Love is the key word in the relationship between God and Israel. Moses boldly asserted, “Hear, O Israel! The <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, the <span>Lord<\/span> alone. And you must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Dt 6:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>). All other commandments are significant because they bear on that relationship (as spelled out in chs 5–11).<\/p>\n<p>Exclusive love and devotion to God are essential. In a relationship of wholehearted love, no idols can be recognized or tolerated. Yet Moses wanted Israel to convey its consciousness of God to future generations by many external things: signs on their hands, frontlets (or “phylacteries”) on their foreheads, Scripture verses on their doorposts, and so on. By precept and example they should convey to their children that they love God (Dt 6).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should never forget that God had chosen them to be his people (Dt 7). They were to execute God’s judgment on the Canaanites, who had been spared judgment since Abraham’s time (Gn 15:16). Although the Israelites themselves did not merit God’s love, in love and mercy he had redeemed them out of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Moses appealed to the people to remember what God had done for them (Dt 8). To God’s sustaining provisions they should respond with thankfulness, recognizing that the power to achieve anything they had done had been God’s gift.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had repeatedly failed in their faith and commitment to God (9:1–10:11). Through Moses’ intercession they had been spared. It was for no merit of their own that they would enter Canaan; that was God’s gracious provision for them. Moses’ appeal for a wholehearted commitment is summarized in Deuteronomy 10:12–11:32. It is necessary to display reverence, respect, love, and obedience to God (see also 6:5, 13, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The God whom the Israelites must love sincerely and without reservation is the Lord of the cosmos. He is the righteous judge who rules supreme over all nature and history. God loved their forefathers, the patriarchs. He redeemed the Israelites from Egyptian enslavement and gave them his covenant. He manifested himself in helping the orphans, widows, and strangers. He multiplied Israel to be as numerous as the stars of the heavens.<\/p>\n<p>Moses gave two basic instructions to apply in daily life to maintain their relationship with God as a reality: “circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart” (Dt 10:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). He did not refer to physical circumcision, a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gn 17). Circumcision, which was not observed during the years of wilderness wanderings, was reinstituted under Joshua after the Israelites crossed the Jordan River (Jos 5:2-9). Moses referred to “spiritual circumcision” (see Lv 26:40-41; Jer 4:4; 9:25; Rom 2:29). All things that might restrict, interfere with, or negate total devotion to God were to be cut away (circumcised) so that the Israelites would continue to love God with all their heart.<\/p>\n<p>“Love the foreigner” (Dt 10:19) ranks second in importance to wholehearted love for God. Love for the stranger or neighbor is basic to all other human obligations (see Lv 19:9-18). Social obligations issue out of a person’s relationship with God. Being recipients of God’s love, the Israelites were to love others. They were to remember God’s love for them when they were slaves and strangers in Egypt. God loves the stranger, the widow, and the orphan; therefore, if anyone loves God, he or she is under obligation to love other people. God is concerned about justice and righteousness; a person who professes to love God must be concerned about just treatment for other people.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites were to be known for their concern for people whose social position exposed them to exploitation and oppression. The profound humanitarian spirit of the Mosaic law stands in unique contrast to the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian and Hittite law codes of that day. In those codes human relationships reflected no vital consciousness of a love relationship with deity.<\/p>\n<p>In the first century <span>AD<\/span> Jesus Christ came into conflict with Jewish religious leaders who had lost the essence of God’s law in a maze of legalism. For Jesus, the greatest commandment was to love God; the second was to love one’s neighbor. Those two commandments (which constitute the essence of the entire OT revelation) would, if kept perfectly, provide the basis for eternal life (Mt 22:37-39; Mk 12:29-31; Lk 10:27-28). Christians believe that the climax of God’s revelation of love came in Jesus Christ. For them, responding to God’s love means to accept Jesus Christ in wholehearted devotion and to love one’s neighbor as Jesus exemplified in his life.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 12:1–26:19, Moses gave instruction in practical living for a God-related people when they resided in the land God had promised to them. Having once survived on manna supplied directly by God, in Canaan they would enjoy the fruit and produce of the land. They would also encounter a culture permeated by Canaanite religion.<\/p>\n<p>In worshiping God in their new setting, they were cautioned to maintain due sanctity (Dt 12:1–14:21). They were not to worship at pagan shrines. They should bring their offerings to divinely appointed places for fellowship and rejoicing together in the Lord’s presence. Idolatry was not to be tolerated in any form. Any prophet who deviated from the law of Moses in advising the worship of other gods should be stoned. Exclusive devotion to God was to be daily practice.<\/p>\n<p>Canaan’s abundant blessings should be shared with neighbors (14:22–15:23). Tithes should be brought to the central sanctuary where Levites assisted the priests in religious ministration. Joy in sharing life’s blessings and opportunities was to characterize Israel’s pattern of living.<\/p>\n<p>Moses prescribed three annual pilgrimages (16:1-17). The people should remember their deliverance out of Egypt by observing the feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread. Seven weeks later, when the barley harvest was completed, they should spend time rejoicing before the Lord in a one-day festival called the Feast of Weeks. When the vintage as well as the grain harvest was completed, they were to observe the Feast of Ingathering (or Booths), a time of thanksgiving and sharing with others. Every seven years the law was read at the Feast of Ingathering.<\/p>\n<p>In human relations justice was to prevail among the Israelites (16:18–21:23). The Book of the Law kept at the main sanctuary was their divine authority, providing God’s instructions for them. The king was to have a copy of this law and govern his life in accordance with it. Prophets and priests played an important role as religious leaders in the life of Israel. Judicial authority was vested in the priests. In contrast to the brutality of other nations, humanitarian principles were to prevail in Israel’s warfare. Fathers were responsible for their own family households.<\/p>\n<p>In domestic and social relationships, the law of love was to prevail (22:1–26:19). Many regulations governed family life. In matters of sustenance, wages, and business dealings, the Israelites were admonished to be compassionate and just. Promises and warnings raised their consciousness about using the resources of land and animals entrusted to them so that their stewardship would please God.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 26, Moses instructed the Israelites in two liturgical confessions and a reaffirmation of the covenant. By acknowledging that God was the giver of all they had, and by confessing before God that they shared his gifts with others, they confirmed their covenant with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Alternatives: Blessings or Curses (27:1–30:20)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses set before the Israelites the alternatives of blessings or curses. Under Joshua they were to renew the covenant publicly. At Mt Ebal stones were to be erected for inscribing the law and an altar constructed for offering sacrifice. The curses were to be read from Mt Ebal and the blessings from Mt Gerizim. Conditional self-curses were read regarding offenses against God and other human beings (Dt 27:15-26). Thus they acknowledged their accountability to God. Though their sins might be hidden from people, it was God to whom they were primarily and ultimately accountable. Blessings as a way of life and curses as a way of death were clearly set before the Israelites (ch 28). Setting them in the perspective of history, Moses appealed to the new generation to take advantage of their present opportunity (ch 29). Warning that, should they fail to love God, they would ultimately be subjected to dispersion, Moses admonished them to choose the way of life and good rather than the way of death and evil (ch 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Transition: from Moses to Joshua (31:1–34:12)<\/h5>\n<p>When the life and ministry of Moses were nearing completion, and transfer of leadership was near (Dt 31:1–34:12), Joshua had already been designated by God as Israel’s new leader. Moses assured the Israelites that God would be the same with Joshua in charge. The revelation given through Moses had been put in writing and now was committed to the priests, the custodians of the Book of the Law. Joshua, who had already distinguished himself in responsible leadership, was publicly confirmed at the door of the tabernacle (31:1-29).<\/p>\n<p>The “Song of Moses” is the covenant’s document of witness (32:1-47). In it Moses spoke with prophetic understanding as he recounted Israel’s past experience. Reiterating the consequences of their attitude toward God, he assured the people of restoration if they failed again. He encouraged them to fix their hearts on what God had revealed to them and to impress it on their children. Keeping the covenant by maintaining a wholehearted love for God would be important for all future generations as well as for those then listening to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>After some final, brief instructions (32:48-52), Moses pronounced his blessings on the Israelites, whom he had led for 40 years (33:1-29). In his final blessing, also called the “Testament of Moses,” the greatness of God and his special relationship with Israel are delineated. Israel is unique among all the nations of the world.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy appropriately ends with an account of the death of Moses, the greatest prophet in OT times (34:1-12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Moses.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEUTERONOMY, Book of Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for ...","summary_en":"DEUTERONOMY, Book of Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9704,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Discipline","title_en":"Discipline","content_ro":"<h3>DISCIPLINE<\/h3>\n<p>Learning that molds character and enforces correct behavior—from a Latin word meaning “instruction” or “training.” To discipline a person or a group means to put them in a state of good order so that they function in the way intended. Discipline, in spite of a popular misconception, is not inherently stern or harsh. Bible translators chose “disciple” as an appropriate term for one who learns by following.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Biblical Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Self-Discipline<\/p>\n<p>• Parental Discipline<\/p>\n<p>• Church Discipline<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalTeaching\">Biblical Teaching<\/p>\n<p>Although used only once in the <span>kjv<\/span> (Jb 36:10), the word “discipline,” in various noun and verb forms, occurs frequently in modern versions of the Bible. The Hebrew and Greek words commonly rendered “discipline” are sometimes translated as “reproof,” “warning,” “restraint,” “correction,” or (especially in <span>kjv<\/span>) “chastisement.” More positive synonyms include “upbringing,” “training,” “instruction,” and “education.”<\/p>\n<p>OT usage of “discipline” is noticeably more negative than in the NT, principally because of the legal aspect of God’s approach to Israel under the old (Mosaic) covenant. The “new covenant” approach to the church leads to a more positive language of discipline in the NT. Yet both covenants had the same goal: righteousness. Considered in that light, even the OT emphasis on punishment proceeds from a positive motive toward a constructive goal. Where the OT emphasized retaliation, it was to teach offenders the nature of their offense by showing them an effect like the one they had caused. Vindication of a wronged person’s rights also vindicated God’s righteousness. Vindication was an important way of upholding God’s justice. Retribution was also important. Covenant breaking brought on the covenant curse (Dt 27:26) in the form of punitive discipline. Retribution reestablished the authority of God’s law and taught respect for his standards of righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>Complementary to punitive discipline, positive discipline can be thought of as reinforcive discipline. God always disciplines; he does so punitively when necessary, but reinforcingly when possible.<\/p>\n<p>Discipline is frequently spoken of as being exercised by God over Israel (Lv 26:23; Dt 4:36; 8:5; Jer 31:18), over the nations (Ps 94:10), or over individuals (Jb 5:17; Ps 94:10, 12; Heb 12:5-11; Rv 3:19). In Israel parental responsibility to discipline children was taken seriously (Dt 21:18). Fathers were solemnly charged to discipline their sons (Prv 13:24; 19:18; 22:15; 23:13; 29:17; cf. Eph 6:4; Heb 12:7-10). In the church, disciplining was a pastoral responsibility (2 Tm 2:25).<\/p>\n<p>It is understandable that people fear discipline from God (Ps 6:1), but it is his wrath that should be feared. His wrath is directed only against those who have proved themselves by their actions to be God’s enemies (Dt 11:2-3). God’s discipline is different from his wrath and should not be despised (Prv 3:11) or taken for granted (Heb 12:5). Only a fool or wicked person hates it (Ps 50:17; Prv 5:12; Jer 31:18). God disciplines his people as a loving father disciplines a beloved son (Dt 8:5; Prv 3:11-12; Heb 12:5-7). According to Scripture, a wise person should love discipline (Prv 12:1; 13:24; 2 Tm 1:7; Heb 12:5, 9).<\/p>\n<p>The fruit of discipline is knowledge (Prv 12:1) and parents’ delight (29:17). One who is disciplined can be spoken of as “blessed” (Jb 5:17; Ps 94:12). Where the purpose of discipline is left unspecified, the discipline is nevertheless understood as good and righteous (Dt 4:36; Jb 36:10; Prv 13:24; Rv 3:19). Specifically, discipline is called “the way of life” (Prv 6:23). It saves one from destruction (19:18) and allows one to escape both folly (22:15) and God’s condemnation of the world (1 Cor 11:32). It eventually leads to sharing God’s holiness (Heb 12:7), and yields “the peaceful fruit of righteousness” (v 11, <span>rsv<\/span>). In contrast, the consequences of a lack of discipline are stipulated to be abandonment by God (Lv 26:23-24), death (Prv 5:23), and destruction (19:18).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs speaks of discipline as necessary to avoid sexual immorality (5:12-23; 6:23-24). Loose or wicked women probably symbolize many kinds of deceptive and enticing situations. To be able to act maturely and responsibly in such situations requires that young people respond to wise and loving parental discipline so that they learn to live disciplined lives. They will then do by “bent of nature” what is right because their nature has been shaped to what it right. Evil can then be shunned, even when it is encountered unexpectedly.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Hebrews also urges its readers to respond to discipline rather than to react against it. In Hebrews two harmful reactions are stipulated and the helpful response is identified. On the one hand, no individual should regard lightly the discipline of the Lord (Heb 12:5). Discipline should be regarded neither as worthless nor as being of little value. On the other hand, one should not lose courage when he is punished by the Lord. That is, preoccupation with the negative aspect of the disciplinary procedure must not obscure its goal or demoralize persons being disciplined. There is a purpose for what happens, which should be sought and realized: “No discipline is enjoyable while it happening—it is painful! But afterward there will be a quiet harvest of right living for those who are trained in this way” (Heb 12:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). The exhortation is not to reject discipline or be dejected by it, but to accept it and be instructed by it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Self-Discipline\">Self-Discipline<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ ethics of righteousness both fulfill and surpass the stringent code of the old covenant (Mt 5:17-48). Yet Christians are not therefore inherently more legalistic than were the Pharisees. Set free from “the law of sin and death,” Christians have “the law of the Spirit of life in Jesus Christ” (Rom 8:1-8) to provide a built-in dynamic to fulfill the will of God. Beyond slavish obedience to the letter of the law, believers are enabled by the indwelling Spirit of God to exercise self-discipline. Spiritual transformation is accompanied by renewal of the mind (Rom 12:2), which brings fresh understanding of oneself, one’s motivations, and one’s attitudes.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ParentalDiscipline\">Parental Discipline<\/p>\n<p>The family constitutes the basic unit of the human community. Within that cell of intimate relationships, parents are entrusted with the responsibility of guiding and correcting their children (Dt 6:7; Prv 22:6). The biblical view is essentially pessimistic about the perfectibility of human nature. Therefore, parents are urged not to leave children at the mercy of their own natural tendencies. Undisciplined children are potential victims of the powerful conditioning exerted by a predominantly pagan culture. To exercise their responsibilities properly, parents must model values, practices, and attitudes to their children, besides teaching them through instruction and correction.<\/p>\n<p>The parents’ educational task is best accomplished through positive means such as advice, exhortation, counseling, family devotions, and Christian training in church and Sunday school. But it also may require negative measures, such as prohibitions and disciplinary action. When verbal admonitions are not heeded by small children, punishment becomes an effective form of persuasion (Prv 13:24). Physical discipline, however, should be administered on the basis of clearly stated and understood principles. Christian parents must avoid punishing out of anger or personal animosity, and must never cause injury to a child. Physical discipline should be viewed as a last resort intended to obtain maximum educational results with minimum outrage to children (Eph 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Human fallenness (Gn 3) means that self-centeredness infects even children (cf. Ps 51:5). Somehow children must learn respect for themselves and for others. Left on their own and then battered by a fallen society, they can become rebellious social misfits leaving a trail of heartache in their own lives and in the lives of other people. Love for one’s children does not preclude the use of negative disciplinary measures. As distasteful as they may seem to both parents and children, genuine love may require them. A family environment regulated by consistent and loving firmness will enhance the chances for children to mature as responsible and considerate individuals.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChurchDiscipline\">Church Discipline<\/p>\n<p>The church is basically a large family of which each believer is a member. The nature of the church—as a community intended to reflect in the faith, worship, and lives of its members the true character of God—distinguishes it from all other groups.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, the church is called to be an open community of concern, reaching out in compassion to desperately needy human beings. Christian lifestyles clearly differ from pagan lifestyles. That difference often creates a barrier isolating the “lost” from the very people who could extend to them God’s deliverance from loneliness, addictions, disorientation, broken relationships, and so on. The church has a responsibility not to place unscriptural obstacles in the way of its outreach to unbelievers, yet the tension between openness and purity is difficult to resolve. Without a careful balance, a church can easily become unduly restrictive or overly permissive. In either extreme its witness is impaired.<\/p>\n<p>The solution to the dilemma lies in formulating church discipline that is authentically biblical. The Scriptures provide the church with ample guidance for the formulation of standards of conduct (e.g., Ex 20:1-17; 1 Cor 5:11; 6:9-11; Eph 4:25-32; 5:1-21; Col 3:5-11). As those standards are spelled out, however, it is necessary to differentiate between biblical absolutes and cultural norms. For instance, though drunkenness is expressly forbidden in the NT, there is no scriptural prohibition on the drinking of wine. Some churches allow drinking but decry drunkenness, others recommend abstinence to their members, and still others make abstinence from alcoholic beverages a condition of membership. The NT, recognizing that conflict sometimes occurs between Christian liberty and Christian responsibility, gives guidelines for resolving such conflicts (1 Cor 8).<\/p>\n<p>For the sake of scriptural consistency and in order to be credible, church discipline should oppose sins of attitude with the same severity as for “gross sins.” The NT condemns immorality, murder, and drunkenness—but along with them envy, jealousy, anger, selfishness, complaining, and criticism. Each of the vices is an impediment to entering the kingdom of God (Gal 5:19-21). Unbelievers are often made to feel unwelcome in the church because of secondary matters such as smoking or drinking. Yet gossiping, complaining, and selfishness among church members are seldom exposed and properly disciplined. A more consistent position would promote the purity of the church and would also enhance its ministry as a supportive, accepting center of Christian love.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to affirming the necessity for discipline within the church, the NT delineates a procedure for carrying out disciplinary action (Mt 18:15-18; 1 Cor 5:3-13; Gal 6:1). Offenders are first to be approached and admonished privately. If they refuse to repent or mend their ways, the case is to be presented before the leadership of the church and then, if necessary, before the whole congregation. Should offenders persist in their error, they are to be ostracized, not out of vindictiveness but with the hope of bringing them to repentance and restoration (2 Thes 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s emphasis on the necessity for self-discipline, parental discipline, and church discipline seems underscored by the moral decline evident in many areas of modern society. God’s love, as depicted in the Bible and exemplified in Jesus Christ, is intended to teach all people how to live. Those who spurn God’s “positive reinforcement” encounter the negative aspects of his discipline. Christians who discipline themselves, their children, and each other in a loving way honor Christ and model his way of life, thus helping others to understand God’s purposes.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DISCIPLINE<\/h3>\n<p>Learning that molds character and enforces correct behavior—from a Latin word meaning “instruction” or “training.” To discipline a person or a group means to put them in a state of good order so that they function in the way intended. Discipline, in spite of a popular misconception, is not inherently stern or harsh. Bible translators chose “disciple” as an appropriate term for one who learns by following.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Biblical Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Self-Discipline<\/p>\n<p>• Parental Discipline<\/p>\n<p>• Church Discipline<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalTeaching\">Biblical Teaching<\/p>\n<p>Although used only once in the <span>kjv<\/span> (Jb 36:10), the word “discipline,” in various noun and verb forms, occurs frequently in modern versions of the Bible. The Hebrew and Greek words commonly rendered “discipline” are sometimes translated as “reproof,” “warning,” “restraint,” “correction,” or (especially in <span>kjv<\/span>) “chastisement.” More positive synonyms include “upbringing,” “training,” “instruction,” and “education.”<\/p>\n<p>OT usage of “discipline” is noticeably more negative than in the NT, principally because of the legal aspect of God’s approach to Israel under the old (Mosaic) covenant. The “new covenant” approach to the church leads to a more positive language of discipline in the NT. Yet both covenants had the same goal: righteousness. Considered in that light, even the OT emphasis on punishment proceeds from a positive motive toward a constructive goal. Where the OT emphasized retaliation, it was to teach offenders the nature of their offense by showing them an effect like the one they had caused. Vindication of a wronged person’s rights also vindicated God’s righteousness. Vindication was an important way of upholding God’s justice. Retribution was also important. Covenant breaking brought on the covenant curse (Dt 27:26) in the form of punitive discipline. Retribution reestablished the authority of God’s law and taught respect for his standards of righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>Complementary to punitive discipline, positive discipline can be thought of as reinforcive discipline. God always disciplines; he does so punitively when necessary, but reinforcingly when possible.<\/p>\n<p>Discipline is frequently spoken of as being exercised by God over Israel (Lv 26:23; Dt 4:36; 8:5; Jer 31:18), over the nations (Ps 94:10), or over individuals (Jb 5:17; Ps 94:10, 12; Heb 12:5-11; Rv 3:19). In Israel parental responsibility to discipline children was taken seriously (Dt 21:18). Fathers were solemnly charged to discipline their sons (Prv 13:24; 19:18; 22:15; 23:13; 29:17; cf. Eph 6:4; Heb 12:7-10). In the church, disciplining was a pastoral responsibility (2 Tm 2:25).<\/p>\n<p>It is understandable that people fear discipline from God (Ps 6:1), but it is his wrath that should be feared. His wrath is directed only against those who have proved themselves by their actions to be God’s enemies (Dt 11:2-3). God’s discipline is different from his wrath and should not be despised (Prv 3:11) or taken for granted (Heb 12:5). Only a fool or wicked person hates it (Ps 50:17; Prv 5:12; Jer 31:18). God disciplines his people as a loving father disciplines a beloved son (Dt 8:5; Prv 3:11-12; Heb 12:5-7). According to Scripture, a wise person should love discipline (Prv 12:1; 13:24; 2 Tm 1:7; Heb 12:5, 9).<\/p>\n<p>The fruit of discipline is knowledge (Prv 12:1) and parents’ delight (29:17). One who is disciplined can be spoken of as “blessed” (Jb 5:17; Ps 94:12). Where the purpose of discipline is left unspecified, the discipline is nevertheless understood as good and righteous (Dt 4:36; Jb 36:10; Prv 13:24; Rv 3:19). Specifically, discipline is called “the way of life” (Prv 6:23). It saves one from destruction (19:18) and allows one to escape both folly (22:15) and God’s condemnation of the world (1 Cor 11:32). It eventually leads to sharing God’s holiness (Heb 12:7), and yields “the peaceful fruit of righteousness” (v 11, <span>rsv<\/span>). In contrast, the consequences of a lack of discipline are stipulated to be abandonment by God (Lv 26:23-24), death (Prv 5:23), and destruction (19:18).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs speaks of discipline as necessary to avoid sexual immorality (5:12-23; 6:23-24). Loose or wicked women probably symbolize many kinds of deceptive and enticing situations. To be able to act maturely and responsibly in such situations requires that young people respond to wise and loving parental discipline so that they learn to live disciplined lives. They will then do by “bent of nature” what is right because their nature has been shaped to what it right. Evil can then be shunned, even when it is encountered unexpectedly.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Hebrews also urges its readers to respond to discipline rather than to react against it. In Hebrews two harmful reactions are stipulated and the helpful response is identified. On the one hand, no individual should regard lightly the discipline of the Lord (Heb 12:5). Discipline should be regarded neither as worthless nor as being of little value. On the other hand, one should not lose courage when he is punished by the Lord. That is, preoccupation with the negative aspect of the disciplinary procedure must not obscure its goal or demoralize persons being disciplined. There is a purpose for what happens, which should be sought and realized: “No discipline is enjoyable while it happening—it is painful! But afterward there will be a quiet harvest of right living for those who are trained in this way” (Heb 12:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). The exhortation is not to reject discipline or be dejected by it, but to accept it and be instructed by it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Self-Discipline\">Self-Discipline<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ ethics of righteousness both fulfill and surpass the stringent code of the old covenant (Mt 5:17-48). Yet Christians are not therefore inherently more legalistic than were the Pharisees. Set free from “the law of sin and death,” Christians have “the law of the Spirit of life in Jesus Christ” (Rom 8:1-8) to provide a built-in dynamic to fulfill the will of God. Beyond slavish obedience to the letter of the law, believers are enabled by the indwelling Spirit of God to exercise self-discipline. Spiritual transformation is accompanied by renewal of the mind (Rom 12:2), which brings fresh understanding of oneself, one’s motivations, and one’s attitudes.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ParentalDiscipline\">Parental Discipline<\/p>\n<p>The family constitutes the basic unit of the human community. Within that cell of intimate relationships, parents are entrusted with the responsibility of guiding and correcting their children (Dt 6:7; Prv 22:6). The biblical view is essentially pessimistic about the perfectibility of human nature. Therefore, parents are urged not to leave children at the mercy of their own natural tendencies. Undisciplined children are potential victims of the powerful conditioning exerted by a predominantly pagan culture. To exercise their responsibilities properly, parents must model values, practices, and attitudes to their children, besides teaching them through instruction and correction.<\/p>\n<p>The parents’ educational task is best accomplished through positive means such as advice, exhortation, counseling, family devotions, and Christian training in church and Sunday school. But it also may require negative measures, such as prohibitions and disciplinary action. When verbal admonitions are not heeded by small children, punishment becomes an effective form of persuasion (Prv 13:24). Physical discipline, however, should be administered on the basis of clearly stated and understood principles. Christian parents must avoid punishing out of anger or personal animosity, and must never cause injury to a child. Physical discipline should be viewed as a last resort intended to obtain maximum educational results with minimum outrage to children (Eph 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Human fallenness (Gn 3) means that self-centeredness infects even children (cf. Ps 51:5). Somehow children must learn respect for themselves and for others. Left on their own and then battered by a fallen society, they can become rebellious social misfits leaving a trail of heartache in their own lives and in the lives of other people. Love for one’s children does not preclude the use of negative disciplinary measures. As distasteful as they may seem to both parents and children, genuine love may require them. A family environment regulated by consistent and loving firmness will enhance the chances for children to mature as responsible and considerate individuals.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChurchDiscipline\">Church Discipline<\/p>\n<p>The church is basically a large family of which each believer is a member. The nature of the church—as a community intended to reflect in the faith, worship, and lives of its members the true character of God—distinguishes it from all other groups.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, the church is called to be an open community of concern, reaching out in compassion to desperately needy human beings. Christian lifestyles clearly differ from pagan lifestyles. That difference often creates a barrier isolating the “lost” from the very people who could extend to them God’s deliverance from loneliness, addictions, disorientation, broken relationships, and so on. The church has a responsibility not to place unscriptural obstacles in the way of its outreach to unbelievers, yet the tension between openness and purity is difficult to resolve. Without a careful balance, a church can easily become unduly restrictive or overly permissive. In either extreme its witness is impaired.<\/p>\n<p>The solution to the dilemma lies in formulating church discipline that is authentically biblical. The Scriptures provide the church with ample guidance for the formulation of standards of conduct (e.g., Ex 20:1-17; 1 Cor 5:11; 6:9-11; Eph 4:25-32; 5:1-21; Col 3:5-11). As those standards are spelled out, however, it is necessary to differentiate between biblical absolutes and cultural norms. For instance, though drunkenness is expressly forbidden in the NT, there is no scriptural prohibition on the drinking of wine. Some churches allow drinking but decry drunkenness, others recommend abstinence to their members, and still others make abstinence from alcoholic beverages a condition of membership. The NT, recognizing that conflict sometimes occurs between Christian liberty and Christian responsibility, gives guidelines for resolving such conflicts (1 Cor 8).<\/p>\n<p>For the sake of scriptural consistency and in order to be credible, church discipline should oppose sins of attitude with the same severity as for “gross sins.” The NT condemns immorality, murder, and drunkenness—but along with them envy, jealousy, anger, selfishness, complaining, and criticism. Each of the vices is an impediment to entering the kingdom of God (Gal 5:19-21). Unbelievers are often made to feel unwelcome in the church because of secondary matters such as smoking or drinking. Yet gossiping, complaining, and selfishness among church members are seldom exposed and properly disciplined. A more consistent position would promote the purity of the church and would also enhance its ministry as a supportive, accepting center of Christian love.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to affirming the necessity for discipline within the church, the NT delineates a procedure for carrying out disciplinary action (Mt 18:15-18; 1 Cor 5:3-13; Gal 6:1). Offenders are first to be approached and admonished privately. If they refuse to repent or mend their ways, the case is to be presented before the leadership of the church and then, if necessary, before the whole congregation. Should offenders persist in their error, they are to be ostracized, not out of vindictiveness but with the hope of bringing them to repentance and restoration (2 Thes 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s emphasis on the necessity for self-discipline, parental discipline, and church discipline seems underscored by the moral decline evident in many areas of modern society. God’s love, as depicted in the Bible and exemplified in Jesus Christ, is intended to teach all people how to live. Those who spurn God’s “positive reinforcement” encounter the negative aspects of his discipline. Christians who discipline themselves, their children, and each other in a loving way honor Christ and model his way of life, thus helping others to understand God’s purposes.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DISCIPLINE Learning that molds character and enforces correct behavior—from a Latin word meaning “instruction” or “training.” To discipline a person or a group means to put them in a state of good order so that they function in the way intended. Discipline, in spite of a popular misconception, is not inherently stern or harsh. Bible translators chose “disciple” as an appropriate term for one who learns by following. Preview • Biblical Teaching • Self-Discipline • Parental Discipline • Church ...","summary_en":"DISCIPLINE Learning that molds character and enforces correct behavior—from a Latin word meaning “instruction” or “training.” To discipline a person or a group means to put them in a state of good order so that they function in the way intended. Discipline, in spite of a popular misconception, is not inherently stern or harsh. Bible translators chose “disciple” as an appropriate term for one who learns by following. Preview • Biblical Teaching • Self-Discipline • Parental Discipline • Church ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11448,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Exodus","title_en":"Book of Exodus","content_ro":"<h3>EXODUS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives the basis for this religious, political, and social life.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the book of Exodus is so frequently referred to in the OT and NT that theologians speak of an “exodus motif.” In Psalm 68, for example, David received assurance in remembering that his God was the same one who rescued Israel from Egypt. The prophet Jeremiah compared the future regathering of Israel to their exodus from Egypt as an even more miraculous event (Jer 16:14-15). The return of Jesus and his parents from Egypt is associated with the exodus in Matthew 2:13-15. The deliverance of the Jewish people from Egypt was interpreted as a prototype for God’s freeing of all his people, both Israel and the church. Thus, the message of the book of Exodus is foundational to understanding God’s plan of salvation throughout the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The English title “Exodus” comes from the Septuagint, a pre-Christian translation of the OT into Greek. The word means “a way out” or “departure” and refers to Israel’s rescue from Egypt. The Hebrew title is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shemoth<\/span> (“these are the names”), from the book’s opening words, referring to the names of the sons of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>According to tradition, Exodus and the entire Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) were written by Moses. Exodus was probably written at Mt Sinai or shortly after the events there, according to this view. There is much to support that claim: (1) The book states that Moses wrote God’s words in at least one book (Ex 17:14; 24:2, 7; 34:27-28). According to Deuteronomy 31:9, 24, Moses recorded God’s law in a book that was deposited beside the ark of the covenant as a witness for God. (2) Many OT writers referred to portions of Exodus as the “law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3; 2 Chr 34:14; Neh 8:1; 13:1). The NT, including the testimony of Jesus, calls Moses the author (Mk 7:10; 12:26; Jn 1:45; 7:19).<\/p>\n<p>Various other theories about the origin of Exodus have been proposed. Some scholars credit Moses with writing nearly the entire book. One writer claims that Moses was an unknown desert sheikh who never even met the Israelites. Some critics think they detect in the book several documents from various periods in Israel’s history that were finally put together by an editor centuries after Moses’ death. Others have isolated various literary forms, such as the “Song of Moses” (Ex 15), and traced their development. Another interpretation says that the exodus story was passed on by word of mouth for many generations before being written.<\/p>\n<p>Although such theories are held by biblical scholars, they deny what the text of the book repeatedly affirms: that Moses wrote Exodus. The book of Exodus contains evidence of being written by an eyewitness. Only such a person would recall, for example, that there were 12 fountains and 70 palm trees at Elim (Ex 15:27). The author shows a thorough knowledge of Egyptian court life, customs, and language. Some of the materials used to construct the tabernacle, such as acacia wood for its furniture (25:10) and rams’ skins for the outer covering (v 5), are found in Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula but not in Palestine. The book thus seems to have had a desert setting.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was not only commissioned by God to write the book of Exodus, but he was also well qualified. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty in his words and deeds” (Acts 7:22, <span>rsv<\/span>). In addition, the 40 years spent in the wilderness of Midian and Sinai gave him a thorough knowledge of the geography and wildlife of the regions through which the Israelites traveled. The events of the exodus—deliverance from the Egyptians and God’s giving of the law—were so central to the history of Israel that Moses took special care to preserve the record so it could be passed on to following generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>If one accepts the traditional view that Moses wrote Exodus, then the book is to be dated in the time of Moses. Two dates are generally suggested for the exodus from Egypt.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The “Late Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh who oppressed the Israelites was Seti I (Sethos, c. 1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Ramses II (c. 1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). The exodus would thus have occurred in 1290, and the conquest of Canaan would have begun in 1250. There are two principal arguments for this view: (1) According to Exodus 1:11, the Israelites were forced to build the store city of Rameses; therefore, Ramses II must have been ruling at the time. But the city of Rameses could have existed earlier under a different name and then been renamed after Ramses II when he rebuilt it. Or there could have been an earlier monarch named Ramses who commissioned its construction. (2) There is archaeological evidence of movements of people and widespread destruction in Canaan around 1250 <span>BC<\/span>. If this destruction was caused by the Hebrew conquest under Joshua, it would place the exodus around 1290. But it could just as easily have been the result of social turbulence and anarchy in the period of the Israelite judges, or of the military activities of neighboring peoples.<\/p>\n<h5>The “Early Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh of the oppression was Thutmose III (c. 1504–1450 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Amenhotep II (c. 1450–1424 <span>BC<\/span>). Thus, the exodus would have occurred about 1440, and the conquest would have begun around 1400. Three chief arguments support that view: (1) If the fourth year of King Solomon was 966 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 would place the exodus at 1446. (2) If the time of Jephthah was 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 300 years of Judges 11:26 would date the conquest at 1400. (3) The late date would not leave enough time for the period of the judges, which most chronologies indicate lasted between 300 and 400 years. On the basis of such biblical references to the date of the exodus, the early date appears preferable.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Some events in Egypt during the period covered by the book of Exodus shed additional light on the biblical record. Exodus 12:40 records that the Israelites lived in Egypt for 430 years. That would place the settling of Jacob and his family in Goshen (Gn 47:4, 11) at about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>, during the powerful 12th dynasty of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom. Around the turn of the century, two weaker dynasties followed. Semite invaders from Asia began to infiltrate northern (or Lower) Egypt. Those outsiders, known as the Hyksos, were able to displace the native dynasty with their own king around 1730. That was the “new king” who “did not know Joseph” (Ex 1:8). Being foreigners themselves, they were naturally concerned about the Israelites, who were too many and too mighty for them (v 9). Enslavement was the easiest solution to the problem of the Israelites. The Hyksos kings could use the new source of labor to enlarge Rameses, at that time the capital of Lower Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Not until about 1580 <span>BC<\/span> were the Egyptians, led by Ahmose, able to drive out the Hyksos and reestablish an Egyptian line of kings. Because the Israelites were still multiplying, despite their hard labor, the pharaohs of the 18th dynasty continued their bondage and decreed that all male children must be killed. When Moses was born (c. 1560 <span>BC<\/span>), that edict was still in effect. Thutmose I (1539–1514), the great empire builder and third of that dynasty, was pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>Thutmose I’s only surviving legal heir was a daughter, Hatshepsut. Her husband assumed the name Thutmose II (1514–1504). When he died, another of the pharaoh’s descendants was named the successor—Thutmose III (1504–1450), who was ten years old at the time. Hatshepsut took the kingdom from the young ruler and controlled it for 22 years (1503–1482). Such a strong-willed woman could have the nerve to disobey her father’s command by saving the life of a Hebrew baby and raising him in the palace at Thebes.<\/p>\n<p>Hatshepsut, who continued to rule despite Thutmose III’s coronation, possibly intended for Moses to have the throne, or at least a high position in the realm. Thutmose III, once he had full power after Hatshepsut’s death, would have been eager to do away with Moses. Moses’ hurried flight into the wilderness after killing the overseer fits well with such historical possibilities. Thutmose III’s death in 1450 <span>BC<\/span> opened the way for Moses to return and confront Pharaoh Amenhotep II with God’s command, “Let my people go.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the book of Exodus is to show how God’s promise to Abraham (Gn 15:12-16) was fulfilled when the Lord rescued the Israelite descendants of Abraham from Egyptian bondage. It also explains the origin of the Passover festival, the beginning of the nation by God’s establishment of a covenant with Israel, and the giving of the law on Mt Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus tells the moving story of a mighty God, creator of the universe, beyond all limitations of time and space, who intervenes in history on behalf of a helpless group of slaves. God defeats the ruler of the greatest empire on earth and then leads his oppressed people from that land to freedom. Exodus is the story of a single family that providentially grows into a multitude. Through God’s covenant a nation is formed, and through his law the nation is given stability and set apart from all its neighbors. The book of Exodus tells of an unusual man, whose 80 years of preparation are equally divided between the palace of a king and the pasture of a nomadic priest. Moses is a reluctant leader, but he defies the pharaoh, speaks with God face-to-face, and writes nearly one-fourth of the Hebrew Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>The God of Exodus is faithful. He makes promises and keeps them. Genesis 15:13-16 records an amazing prophecy: “Then the <span>Lord<\/span> said to Abram, ‘Know of a surety that your descendants will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs, and will be slaves there, and they will be oppressed for four hundred years; but I will bring judgment on the nation which they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. . . . And they shall come back here in the fourth generation’ ” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In response to this promise, Joseph, “at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his burial” (Heb 11:22, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>That promise provides a background for the drama of redemption on which the book of Exodus focuses. Redemption can be defined as “deliverance from the power of an alien dominion, and enjoyment of the resulting freedom.” It speaks of a deliverer and what he does to achieve deliverance. The book of Exodus is full of the vocabulary of redemption. It tells of the God who “remembers” his promise to the Hebrew patriarchs (Ex 2:24; 6:5). God “comes down to deliver” the Israelites (3:8), or “save” them (14:30; 15:2), in order to “bring them” out of the land of Egypt (3:10-12). Redemption involves these aspects:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Lord is the author of redemption. In Exodus 6:1-8, as God answered Moses’ prayer to deliver his people, he used the pronoun “I” 18 times to emphasize that he was the one initiating the action. The Hebrew descendants of Abraham had known God primarily by the Hebrew name “El,” a common title in the ancient Near East for the supreme deity. But in Exodus, Israel learned that God is “Jehovah” or “Yahweh.” That is his personal name, a reminder that he is the God of the covenant who personally cares for his people’s welfare. In Exodus 3:14, God told Moses, “I am who I am” or “I will be who I will be.” Some scholars think that statement shows that the name Yahweh comes from the Hebrew verb “to be.” In any case, the concept of “name” in the Hebrew culture is synonymous with “character.” To know the name of God is to know something of his character. Israel knew God as the one who is eternally self-existent yet present with them wherever they would go, acting on their behalf (Ex 3:12; 33:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. The reason for redemption was God’s promise to the forefathers of the Israelites. When God heard the groaning of the people of Israel, he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob (Ex 2:24; cf. 6:5). In response to their need, he selected an agent of redemption, the unwilling Moses. Moses exhausted every possible excuse, but God would not take no for an answer. Moses is a vivid example of how God prepares, empowers, and sustains his chosen servants, using them to accomplish his purpose.<\/li>\n<li>3. The motive of redemption was God’s grace and love (Ex 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7). The purpose of redemption was that Israel and the Egyptians might know God (6:7; 7:5; 8:10; 14:18). The Lord worked so that all who were involved—Moses, the Israelites, Pharaoh, and the Egyptians—would be sure that he alone is God. The Hebrew understanding of knowledge is not primarily intellectual but experience-oriented. The desired response to God’s action is not mere mental assent but also faith and obedience.<\/li>\n<li>4. Redemption is achieved in Exodus by miracles (4:21)—all natural processes controlled supernaturally by God. They are variously described as signs and wonders (7:3), great acts of judgment (6:6; 7:4), and “the finger of God” (8:19). Such miracles were not frivolous fireworks but purposeful works of God. Some of the miracles prove that Moses was sent by God. The miraculous plagues proved that God is supreme, for each of them was a direct challenge to one of the gods of Egypt: Osiris the river god, Yeqt the frog god, Ra (Re) the sun god, Athor the cattle god. The miracles in the wilderness proved that God fulfills all the needs of his people.<\/li>\n<li>5. The pharaoh was the villain—a picture of rebellious humanity confronted by God’s command (Ex 4:21-23). Ten times the pharaoh hardened his heart. Yet, in a sense, it was God who hardened the pharaoh’s heart, effecting the king’s decision to defy him.<\/li>\n<li>6. The Passover marked the purchase of redemption (Ex 12:23-27; 15:16). It was a clear example of salvation by substitution. When the death angel saw the blood on the doorposts and lintels, he passed by.<\/li>\n<li>7. The recipients of God’s redemption in Exodus were the Israelites. God took them as his own special people (6:7), and they were no longer free to do as they pleased. Even before the exodus he had claimed them, telling Pharaoh, “Israel is my first-born son, and I say to you, ‘Let my son go that he may serve me’ ” (4:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/li>\n<li>8. The demand of redemption was obedience. On the basis of his deliverance of the Israelites from bondage, God set forth the Ten Commandments (20:1-17) and the rest of the law for them to obey. The people, though quick to pledge their obedience (19:8; 24:3), were even quicker to disobey (32:8). Because the Lord is holy and wants his people to be holy and wholehearted in devotion (34:14), he must punish iniquity. But being compassionate, he also forgives. Throughout the centuries of Israel’s history, God pleaded with his people through the prophets to remember the exodus and repent (see Mi 6:3-4). The faithful responded in gratitude with Moses’ “song of redemption” (Ex 15; cf. Rv 15:3-4).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus can be divided into four sections, each describing one aspect of God’s dealings with the Israelites during the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Unveiling (Ex 1–6)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus begins with the 70 descendants of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt for the duration of a famine that was afflicting their land (cf. Gn 46–50). After more than a century of prosperity for the Israelites in the land of Goshen, a new dynasty is established in Egypt whose leaders are not friendly toward Israel. In order to stem the rapid growth of the Hebrew people, the Egyptians force them to do hard labor, building storage cities for the pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>A further command requires all Israelite male children to be killed at birth. The superintendents of the midwives do not comply, however, and God rewards them—not to show his approval of their lie but because they fear and obey God rather than the pharaoh. A new command calls for all male Israelite babies to be drowned in the Nile River. One special child, who escapes when Pharaoh’s daughter has his basket fished out of the Nile, is Moses. Ironically, Moses’ mother is paid by the princess to raise her own child, who grows up in the palace as the princess’s adopted son.<\/p>\n<p>As an adult, Moses chooses to identify with his Hebrew kin, a tribute to the early instruction given him by his godly parents (see Heb 11:24-26). He sets out to liberate Israel from the Egyptians, one man at a time. But he has to flee to Midian, at the eastern edge of the Sinai Peninsula or in Arabia beyond the northern top of the Gulf of Aqaba. Moses marries into the household of Jethro, also named Reuel. Reuel (“friend of God”) is probably the man’s personal name, and Jethro (“excellence”) his title. Because he is called a “priest of Midian” (Ex 2:16), some scholars have maintained a “Kenite hypothesis,” suggesting that Moses adopted the religion of his father-in-law and taught it to the Israelites. But the Bible states that Moses received his religion by a direct revelation from God. Jethro seems to believe only after he sees that God has rescued Israel from the Egyptians (18:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>While their future deliverer is in Midian, the Israelites continue to be oppressed and cry out to God in their misery (2:23-25). God responds by descending to his people. He came down to rescue Israel (3:8). He appears to Moses in a burning bush and identifies himself as the same God who promised the patriarchs a land “flowing with milk and honey” (3:17). Moses will lead the Israelites there, assisted by his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\n<p>Assured that God’s presence and miraculous signs will accompany him, Moses takes his wife Zipporah and his two sons and departs for Egypt. On the way, the Lord meets him and seeks to put him to death (4:24). That is probably the Hebrew way of saying that God strikes him with a mortal illness. Moses, who is going to deliver God’s people, has neglected the sign of the covenant in failing to circumcise one of his sons (Gn 17:14). Moses recovers after the rite is performed and continues on to Egypt, meeting Aaron at Mt Sinai. Their reception by the Israelites is more cordial than that of Pharaoh, who refuses to honor the God who sent Moses. Instead of releasing the Israelites to offer sacrifices to their God in the wilderness, he increases their burdens. The people complain to Moses, and Moses complains to God. God appears again to Moses (Ex 6), reassuring him that Israel will be delivered by divine power. God’s plan is not a failure—he is just beginning to put it into action.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Deliverance (Ex 7–19)<\/h5>\n<p>Chapters 7–12 record ten plagues with which God afflicts the Egyptians. Even before the first of them, the pharaoh has hardened his heart to defy God (7:13). There are three cycles of three plagues each:<\/p>\n\n<p> The first three plagues affect both the Egyptians and the Israelites; the Israelites are protected from the final six. The Egyptian magicians are able to duplicate the first two plagues, but when the third strikes, they admit, “This is the finger of God” (8:19). After the plague of flies covers the land, the pharaoh offers Moses the first of four compromises, but Moses refuses all of them (8:25-29; 10:8-11, 24-29). The first plagues are merely unpleasant, but the final ones are destructive and inflict much suffering. Since all of the plagues are common to that area, they themselves are not miraculous. The miracle is how the phenomena are multiplied and limited to the land of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The nine plagues serve to harden the pharaoh’s heart even more, so God prepares one final stroke. The death of every firstborn male, among both animals and humans, will be the fatal blow. God warns the Israelites to get ready to leave. To avert the death angel, they must put blood from an unblemished yearling male sheep or goat on their doorways. While they are eating the Passover meal, the death angel begins moving through the land of Egypt. In anguish the pharaoh drives the Israelites from the land; the slaves are free at last. Just as he has promised, the Lord goes before the children of Israel in a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night.<\/p>\n<p>But once again the pharaoh’s heart is hardened and he gives pursuit. God parts the waters of the sea with a great wind. The literal meaning of the name given that body of water is “sea of reeds.” It could refer to any shoreline where the water is sufficiently shallow for such plants to grow (see 1 Kgs 9:26, where the same term refers to the Gulf of Aqaba near Eloth). Whatever the location, there God hands the Egyptians their final defeat. The rescue is complete.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the Israelites respond with renewed faith in the Lord and with a song of victory and praise (Ex 14:31–15:21). Soon, however, thanksgiving turns into grumbling because of bitter water (15:22-26), lack of meat and bread (16:1-15), and lack of water (17:1-7). In each situation God provides for their need. He also gives them victory over the Amalekites (vv 8-16). As the Israelites approach Mt Sinai, Moses’ family rejoins him, accompanied by Jethro. Jethro now confesses his faith in the God of the Israelites and shares in a fellowship meal with the leaders. He also assists Moses in reorganizing the judicial system, then returns to Midian (ch 18).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites arrive at Mt Sinai, also called Horeb (3:1), and prepare to meet the Lord who has rescued them in fulfillment of his promise to Moses (v 12). The Lord establishes his covenant with Israel, taking them as his own possession, “a kingdom of priests, my holy nation.” They quickly respond, “We will certainly do everything the <span>Lord<\/span> asks of us” (19:5-8, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Instruction (Ex 20–24)<\/h5>\n<p>The God who redeems a people, who literally “buys them back from slavery,” has a right to make certain demands of them. The commandments God gives to Israel at Sinai are not burdensome requirements but protective guidelines for living as God’s people (20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Law (or Torah, meaning “instruction”) revealed at Sinai consists of three parts:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Ten Commandments (ch 20), addressing a person’s relationship to God and other people. Based on God’s nature (and therefore permanent), the Ten Commandments are unique in the history of the nations.<\/p>\n<li>2. The judgments (chs 21–23), social regulations for governing the people as a theocracy, similar in many ways to the law codes of Israel’s neighbors.<\/li>\n<li>3. Ordinances (chs 24–31) regulating religious ceremonies.<\/li>\n<p>All of the laws are given to Moses during the weeks he spends with God on the mountain.<\/p>\n<p>The Ten Commandments form the basis of all other laws in Israel (20:1-17). The first five deal with honoring the Lord, the second five with respecting one’s neighbor. The last commandment deals with one’s thoughts and intentions rather than with specific actions. It thus forms a safeguard against all sins not included in the first nine.<\/p>\n<p>The judgments recorded in chapters 21–23 deal with master-slave relationships (21:1-11), offenses punishable by death (vv 12-17), compensation for injury to persons or damage to property (21:18–22:15), various interpersonal relationships (22:16–23:9), and Sabbaths, feasts, and the offering of firstfruits (23:10-19). Many of the judgments would not take effect until Israel settled in the Promised Land. Accordingly, that section of the Law closes with a solemn warning against being rebellious and adopting pagan ways. It also contains a bright promise that God will drive out Israel’s enemies, protect his people from sickness, and grant them prosperity, if they obey the Lord’s commands (23:22).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 24 records a reaffirmation of the covenant between God and Israel, as Moses seals it with the blood of a sacrifice. In response, God appears to the leaders of the people, giving them a glimpse of his splendor. Then Moses ascends the mountain one more time to receive the stone tablets containing the commandments, as well as further instructions regarding the meeting tent (tabernacle), the priesthood, and worship.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Presence with his People (Ex 25–40)<\/h5>\n<p>After the Lord redeemed the Israelites, he told Moses, “I will make you my own special people, and I will be your God. And you will know that I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God who has rescued you from your slavery in Egypt” (6:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses had seen that wonderful promise fulfilled, yet one further step remained: “I want the people of Israel to build me a sacred residence where I can live among them” (25:8). God’s dwelling among his people is possible because God had descended to deliver the people and because they had pledged to meet his demands. God calls for a contribution from all whose hearts were willing to give, and he shows Moses a detailed pattern of the tabernacle and its furniture. Aaron and his sons are set apart to serve in the tent. Stipulations for the various offerings, including the Day of Atonement, are given. God tells Moses that he has chosen Bezalel and Oholiab to build the tabernacle and to craft its furnishings, having filled them with his Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime the Israelites, who so recently promised total obedience, grow impatient as Moses lingers for 40 days on the mountain. They demand that Aaron make an idol for them. Under pressure, Aaron complies and forms a molten calf, a representation of a pagan deity (32:4).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord informs Moses of the people’s idolatry, revelry, and immorality and says that he is angry enough to destroy all of them and start again with Moses’ offspring. Moses pleads for Israel until the Lord relents, then descends from the mountain to punish the people. Moses pleads again for forgiveness for Israel, and God in mercy pardons their terrible sin (34:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Once more God offers to make a covenant with the people (34:10). Moses spends another 40 days with the Lord, writing the commandments on tablets to replace those smashed when he saw the golden calf. When he returns to the people, his face shines from being in God’s presence, and he must keep it veiled.<\/p>\n<p>Now that Israel has been restored to God’s favor, the construction of the tabernacle can begin. The contributions are so generous that Moses must restrain the people from bringing any more. Finally, all is ready. Moses examines the tabernacle, and it is erected on the first day of the first month, nearly a year after the first Passover. The priests are consecrated, the lamps are lit, and the first burnt sacrifice is offered. A cloud descends, filling the tabernacle with the glory of the Lord. God dwells among his people, the goal of redemption has been attained, and the drama of the book of Exodus has come to an end.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Israel, History of; Moses; Plagues upon Egypt; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EXODUS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives the basis for this religious, political, and social life.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the book of Exodus is so frequently referred to in the OT and NT that theologians speak of an “exodus motif.” In Psalm 68, for example, David received assurance in remembering that his God was the same one who rescued Israel from Egypt. The prophet Jeremiah compared the future regathering of Israel to their exodus from Egypt as an even more miraculous event (Jer 16:14-15). The return of Jesus and his parents from Egypt is associated with the exodus in Matthew 2:13-15. The deliverance of the Jewish people from Egypt was interpreted as a prototype for God’s freeing of all his people, both Israel and the church. Thus, the message of the book of Exodus is foundational to understanding God’s plan of salvation throughout the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The English title “Exodus” comes from the Septuagint, a pre-Christian translation of the OT into Greek. The word means “a way out” or “departure” and refers to Israel’s rescue from Egypt. The Hebrew title is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shemoth<\/span> (“these are the names”), from the book’s opening words, referring to the names of the sons of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>According to tradition, Exodus and the entire Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) were written by Moses. Exodus was probably written at Mt Sinai or shortly after the events there, according to this view. There is much to support that claim: (1) The book states that Moses wrote God’s words in at least one book (Ex 17:14; 24:2, 7; 34:27-28). According to Deuteronomy 31:9, 24, Moses recorded God’s law in a book that was deposited beside the ark of the covenant as a witness for God. (2) Many OT writers referred to portions of Exodus as the “law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3; 2 Chr 34:14; Neh 8:1; 13:1). The NT, including the testimony of Jesus, calls Moses the author (Mk 7:10; 12:26; Jn 1:45; 7:19).<\/p>\n<p>Various other theories about the origin of Exodus have been proposed. Some scholars credit Moses with writing nearly the entire book. One writer claims that Moses was an unknown desert sheikh who never even met the Israelites. Some critics think they detect in the book several documents from various periods in Israel’s history that were finally put together by an editor centuries after Moses’ death. Others have isolated various literary forms, such as the “Song of Moses” (Ex 15), and traced their development. Another interpretation says that the exodus story was passed on by word of mouth for many generations before being written.<\/p>\n<p>Although such theories are held by biblical scholars, they deny what the text of the book repeatedly affirms: that Moses wrote Exodus. The book of Exodus contains evidence of being written by an eyewitness. Only such a person would recall, for example, that there were 12 fountains and 70 palm trees at Elim (Ex 15:27). The author shows a thorough knowledge of Egyptian court life, customs, and language. Some of the materials used to construct the tabernacle, such as acacia wood for its furniture (25:10) and rams’ skins for the outer covering (v 5), are found in Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula but not in Palestine. The book thus seems to have had a desert setting.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was not only commissioned by God to write the book of Exodus, but he was also well qualified. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty in his words and deeds” (Acts 7:22, <span>rsv<\/span>). In addition, the 40 years spent in the wilderness of Midian and Sinai gave him a thorough knowledge of the geography and wildlife of the regions through which the Israelites traveled. The events of the exodus—deliverance from the Egyptians and God’s giving of the law—were so central to the history of Israel that Moses took special care to preserve the record so it could be passed on to following generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>If one accepts the traditional view that Moses wrote Exodus, then the book is to be dated in the time of Moses. Two dates are generally suggested for the exodus from Egypt.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The “Late Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh who oppressed the Israelites was Seti I (Sethos, c. 1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Ramses II (c. 1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). The exodus would thus have occurred in 1290, and the conquest of Canaan would have begun in 1250. There are two principal arguments for this view: (1) According to Exodus 1:11, the Israelites were forced to build the store city of Rameses; therefore, Ramses II must have been ruling at the time. But the city of Rameses could have existed earlier under a different name and then been renamed after Ramses II when he rebuilt it. Or there could have been an earlier monarch named Ramses who commissioned its construction. (2) There is archaeological evidence of movements of people and widespread destruction in Canaan around 1250 <span>BC<\/span>. If this destruction was caused by the Hebrew conquest under Joshua, it would place the exodus around 1290. But it could just as easily have been the result of social turbulence and anarchy in the period of the Israelite judges, or of the military activities of neighboring peoples.<\/p>\n<h5>The “Early Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh of the oppression was Thutmose III (c. 1504–1450 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Amenhotep II (c. 1450–1424 <span>BC<\/span>). Thus, the exodus would have occurred about 1440, and the conquest would have begun around 1400. Three chief arguments support that view: (1) If the fourth year of King Solomon was 966 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 would place the exodus at 1446. (2) If the time of Jephthah was 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 300 years of Judges 11:26 would date the conquest at 1400. (3) The late date would not leave enough time for the period of the judges, which most chronologies indicate lasted between 300 and 400 years. On the basis of such biblical references to the date of the exodus, the early date appears preferable.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Some events in Egypt during the period covered by the book of Exodus shed additional light on the biblical record. Exodus 12:40 records that the Israelites lived in Egypt for 430 years. That would place the settling of Jacob and his family in Goshen (Gn 47:4, 11) at about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>, during the powerful 12th dynasty of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom. Around the turn of the century, two weaker dynasties followed. Semite invaders from Asia began to infiltrate northern (or Lower) Egypt. Those outsiders, known as the Hyksos, were able to displace the native dynasty with their own king around 1730. That was the “new king” who “did not know Joseph” (Ex 1:8). Being foreigners themselves, they were naturally concerned about the Israelites, who were too many and too mighty for them (v 9). Enslavement was the easiest solution to the problem of the Israelites. The Hyksos kings could use the new source of labor to enlarge Rameses, at that time the capital of Lower Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Not until about 1580 <span>BC<\/span> were the Egyptians, led by Ahmose, able to drive out the Hyksos and reestablish an Egyptian line of kings. Because the Israelites were still multiplying, despite their hard labor, the pharaohs of the 18th dynasty continued their bondage and decreed that all male children must be killed. When Moses was born (c. 1560 <span>BC<\/span>), that edict was still in effect. Thutmose I (1539–1514), the great empire builder and third of that dynasty, was pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>Thutmose I’s only surviving legal heir was a daughter, Hatshepsut. Her husband assumed the name Thutmose II (1514–1504). When he died, another of the pharaoh’s descendants was named the successor—Thutmose III (1504–1450), who was ten years old at the time. Hatshepsut took the kingdom from the young ruler and controlled it for 22 years (1503–1482). Such a strong-willed woman could have the nerve to disobey her father’s command by saving the life of a Hebrew baby and raising him in the palace at Thebes.<\/p>\n<p>Hatshepsut, who continued to rule despite Thutmose III’s coronation, possibly intended for Moses to have the throne, or at least a high position in the realm. Thutmose III, once he had full power after Hatshepsut’s death, would have been eager to do away with Moses. Moses’ hurried flight into the wilderness after killing the overseer fits well with such historical possibilities. Thutmose III’s death in 1450 <span>BC<\/span> opened the way for Moses to return and confront Pharaoh Amenhotep II with God’s command, “Let my people go.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the book of Exodus is to show how God’s promise to Abraham (Gn 15:12-16) was fulfilled when the Lord rescued the Israelite descendants of Abraham from Egyptian bondage. It also explains the origin of the Passover festival, the beginning of the nation by God’s establishment of a covenant with Israel, and the giving of the law on Mt Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus tells the moving story of a mighty God, creator of the universe, beyond all limitations of time and space, who intervenes in history on behalf of a helpless group of slaves. God defeats the ruler of the greatest empire on earth and then leads his oppressed people from that land to freedom. Exodus is the story of a single family that providentially grows into a multitude. Through God’s covenant a nation is formed, and through his law the nation is given stability and set apart from all its neighbors. The book of Exodus tells of an unusual man, whose 80 years of preparation are equally divided between the palace of a king and the pasture of a nomadic priest. Moses is a reluctant leader, but he defies the pharaoh, speaks with God face-to-face, and writes nearly one-fourth of the Hebrew Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>The God of Exodus is faithful. He makes promises and keeps them. Genesis 15:13-16 records an amazing prophecy: “Then the <span>Lord<\/span> said to Abram, ‘Know of a surety that your descendants will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs, and will be slaves there, and they will be oppressed for four hundred years; but I will bring judgment on the nation which they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. . . . And they shall come back here in the fourth generation’ ” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In response to this promise, Joseph, “at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his burial” (Heb 11:22, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>That promise provides a background for the drama of redemption on which the book of Exodus focuses. Redemption can be defined as “deliverance from the power of an alien dominion, and enjoyment of the resulting freedom.” It speaks of a deliverer and what he does to achieve deliverance. The book of Exodus is full of the vocabulary of redemption. It tells of the God who “remembers” his promise to the Hebrew patriarchs (Ex 2:24; 6:5). God “comes down to deliver” the Israelites (3:8), or “save” them (14:30; 15:2), in order to “bring them” out of the land of Egypt (3:10-12). Redemption involves these aspects:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Lord is the author of redemption. In Exodus 6:1-8, as God answered Moses’ prayer to deliver his people, he used the pronoun “I” 18 times to emphasize that he was the one initiating the action. The Hebrew descendants of Abraham had known God primarily by the Hebrew name “El,” a common title in the ancient Near East for the supreme deity. But in Exodus, Israel learned that God is “Jehovah” or “Yahweh.” That is his personal name, a reminder that he is the God of the covenant who personally cares for his people’s welfare. In Exodus 3:14, God told Moses, “I am who I am” or “I will be who I will be.” Some scholars think that statement shows that the name Yahweh comes from the Hebrew verb “to be.” In any case, the concept of “name” in the Hebrew culture is synonymous with “character.” To know the name of God is to know something of his character. Israel knew God as the one who is eternally self-existent yet present with them wherever they would go, acting on their behalf (Ex 3:12; 33:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. The reason for redemption was God’s promise to the forefathers of the Israelites. When God heard the groaning of the people of Israel, he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob (Ex 2:24; cf. 6:5). In response to their need, he selected an agent of redemption, the unwilling Moses. Moses exhausted every possible excuse, but God would not take no for an answer. Moses is a vivid example of how God prepares, empowers, and sustains his chosen servants, using them to accomplish his purpose.<\/li>\n<li>3. The motive of redemption was God’s grace and love (Ex 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7). The purpose of redemption was that Israel and the Egyptians might know God (6:7; 7:5; 8:10; 14:18). The Lord worked so that all who were involved—Moses, the Israelites, Pharaoh, and the Egyptians—would be sure that he alone is God. The Hebrew understanding of knowledge is not primarily intellectual but experience-oriented. The desired response to God’s action is not mere mental assent but also faith and obedience.<\/li>\n<li>4. Redemption is achieved in Exodus by miracles (4:21)—all natural processes controlled supernaturally by God. They are variously described as signs and wonders (7:3), great acts of judgment (6:6; 7:4), and “the finger of God” (8:19). Such miracles were not frivolous fireworks but purposeful works of God. Some of the miracles prove that Moses was sent by God. The miraculous plagues proved that God is supreme, for each of them was a direct challenge to one of the gods of Egypt: Osiris the river god, Yeqt the frog god, Ra (Re) the sun god, Athor the cattle god. The miracles in the wilderness proved that God fulfills all the needs of his people.<\/li>\n<li>5. The pharaoh was the villain—a picture of rebellious humanity confronted by God’s command (Ex 4:21-23). Ten times the pharaoh hardened his heart. Yet, in a sense, it was God who hardened the pharaoh’s heart, effecting the king’s decision to defy him.<\/li>\n<li>6. The Passover marked the purchase of redemption (Ex 12:23-27; 15:16). It was a clear example of salvation by substitution. When the death angel saw the blood on the doorposts and lintels, he passed by.<\/li>\n<li>7. The recipients of God’s redemption in Exodus were the Israelites. God took them as his own special people (6:7), and they were no longer free to do as they pleased. Even before the exodus he had claimed them, telling Pharaoh, “Israel is my first-born son, and I say to you, ‘Let my son go that he may serve me’ ” (4:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/li>\n<li>8. The demand of redemption was obedience. On the basis of his deliverance of the Israelites from bondage, God set forth the Ten Commandments (20:1-17) and the rest of the law for them to obey. The people, though quick to pledge their obedience (19:8; 24:3), were even quicker to disobey (32:8). Because the Lord is holy and wants his people to be holy and wholehearted in devotion (34:14), he must punish iniquity. But being compassionate, he also forgives. Throughout the centuries of Israel’s history, God pleaded with his people through the prophets to remember the exodus and repent (see Mi 6:3-4). The faithful responded in gratitude with Moses’ “song of redemption” (Ex 15; cf. Rv 15:3-4).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus can be divided into four sections, each describing one aspect of God’s dealings with the Israelites during the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Unveiling (Ex 1–6)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus begins with the 70 descendants of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt for the duration of a famine that was afflicting their land (cf. Gn 46–50). After more than a century of prosperity for the Israelites in the land of Goshen, a new dynasty is established in Egypt whose leaders are not friendly toward Israel. In order to stem the rapid growth of the Hebrew people, the Egyptians force them to do hard labor, building storage cities for the pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>A further command requires all Israelite male children to be killed at birth. The superintendents of the midwives do not comply, however, and God rewards them—not to show his approval of their lie but because they fear and obey God rather than the pharaoh. A new command calls for all male Israelite babies to be drowned in the Nile River. One special child, who escapes when Pharaoh’s daughter has his basket fished out of the Nile, is Moses. Ironically, Moses’ mother is paid by the princess to raise her own child, who grows up in the palace as the princess’s adopted son.<\/p>\n<p>As an adult, Moses chooses to identify with his Hebrew kin, a tribute to the early instruction given him by his godly parents (see Heb 11:24-26). He sets out to liberate Israel from the Egyptians, one man at a time. But he has to flee to Midian, at the eastern edge of the Sinai Peninsula or in Arabia beyond the northern top of the Gulf of Aqaba. Moses marries into the household of Jethro, also named Reuel. Reuel (“friend of God”) is probably the man’s personal name, and Jethro (“excellence”) his title. Because he is called a “priest of Midian” (Ex 2:16), some scholars have maintained a “Kenite hypothesis,” suggesting that Moses adopted the religion of his father-in-law and taught it to the Israelites. But the Bible states that Moses received his religion by a direct revelation from God. Jethro seems to believe only after he sees that God has rescued Israel from the Egyptians (18:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>While their future deliverer is in Midian, the Israelites continue to be oppressed and cry out to God in their misery (2:23-25). God responds by descending to his people. He came down to rescue Israel (3:8). He appears to Moses in a burning bush and identifies himself as the same God who promised the patriarchs a land “flowing with milk and honey” (3:17). Moses will lead the Israelites there, assisted by his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\n<p>Assured that God’s presence and miraculous signs will accompany him, Moses takes his wife Zipporah and his two sons and departs for Egypt. On the way, the Lord meets him and seeks to put him to death (4:24). That is probably the Hebrew way of saying that God strikes him with a mortal illness. Moses, who is going to deliver God’s people, has neglected the sign of the covenant in failing to circumcise one of his sons (Gn 17:14). Moses recovers after the rite is performed and continues on to Egypt, meeting Aaron at Mt Sinai. Their reception by the Israelites is more cordial than that of Pharaoh, who refuses to honor the God who sent Moses. Instead of releasing the Israelites to offer sacrifices to their God in the wilderness, he increases their burdens. The people complain to Moses, and Moses complains to God. God appears again to Moses (Ex 6), reassuring him that Israel will be delivered by divine power. God’s plan is not a failure—he is just beginning to put it into action.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Deliverance (Ex 7–19)<\/h5>\n<p>Chapters 7–12 record ten plagues with which God afflicts the Egyptians. Even before the first of them, the pharaoh has hardened his heart to defy God (7:13). There are three cycles of three plagues each:<\/p>\n\n<p> The first three plagues affect both the Egyptians and the Israelites; the Israelites are protected from the final six. The Egyptian magicians are able to duplicate the first two plagues, but when the third strikes, they admit, “This is the finger of God” (8:19). After the plague of flies covers the land, the pharaoh offers Moses the first of four compromises, but Moses refuses all of them (8:25-29; 10:8-11, 24-29). The first plagues are merely unpleasant, but the final ones are destructive and inflict much suffering. Since all of the plagues are common to that area, they themselves are not miraculous. The miracle is how the phenomena are multiplied and limited to the land of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The nine plagues serve to harden the pharaoh’s heart even more, so God prepares one final stroke. The death of every firstborn male, among both animals and humans, will be the fatal blow. God warns the Israelites to get ready to leave. To avert the death angel, they must put blood from an unblemished yearling male sheep or goat on their doorways. While they are eating the Passover meal, the death angel begins moving through the land of Egypt. In anguish the pharaoh drives the Israelites from the land; the slaves are free at last. Just as he has promised, the Lord goes before the children of Israel in a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night.<\/p>\n<p>But once again the pharaoh’s heart is hardened and he gives pursuit. God parts the waters of the sea with a great wind. The literal meaning of the name given that body of water is “sea of reeds.” It could refer to any shoreline where the water is sufficiently shallow for such plants to grow (see 1 Kgs 9:26, where the same term refers to the Gulf of Aqaba near Eloth). Whatever the location, there God hands the Egyptians their final defeat. The rescue is complete.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the Israelites respond with renewed faith in the Lord and with a song of victory and praise (Ex 14:31–15:21). Soon, however, thanksgiving turns into grumbling because of bitter water (15:22-26), lack of meat and bread (16:1-15), and lack of water (17:1-7). In each situation God provides for their need. He also gives them victory over the Amalekites (vv 8-16). As the Israelites approach Mt Sinai, Moses’ family rejoins him, accompanied by Jethro. Jethro now confesses his faith in the God of the Israelites and shares in a fellowship meal with the leaders. He also assists Moses in reorganizing the judicial system, then returns to Midian (ch 18).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites arrive at Mt Sinai, also called Horeb (3:1), and prepare to meet the Lord who has rescued them in fulfillment of his promise to Moses (v 12). The Lord establishes his covenant with Israel, taking them as his own possession, “a kingdom of priests, my holy nation.” They quickly respond, “We will certainly do everything the <span>Lord<\/span> asks of us” (19:5-8, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Instruction (Ex 20–24)<\/h5>\n<p>The God who redeems a people, who literally “buys them back from slavery,” has a right to make certain demands of them. The commandments God gives to Israel at Sinai are not burdensome requirements but protective guidelines for living as God’s people (20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Law (or Torah, meaning “instruction”) revealed at Sinai consists of three parts:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Ten Commandments (ch 20), addressing a person’s relationship to God and other people. Based on God’s nature (and therefore permanent), the Ten Commandments are unique in the history of the nations.<\/p>\n<li>2. The judgments (chs 21–23), social regulations for governing the people as a theocracy, similar in many ways to the law codes of Israel’s neighbors.<\/li>\n<li>3. Ordinances (chs 24–31) regulating religious ceremonies.<\/li>\n<p>All of the laws are given to Moses during the weeks he spends with God on the mountain.<\/p>\n<p>The Ten Commandments form the basis of all other laws in Israel (20:1-17). The first five deal with honoring the Lord, the second five with respecting one’s neighbor. The last commandment deals with one’s thoughts and intentions rather than with specific actions. It thus forms a safeguard against all sins not included in the first nine.<\/p>\n<p>The judgments recorded in chapters 21–23 deal with master-slave relationships (21:1-11), offenses punishable by death (vv 12-17), compensation for injury to persons or damage to property (21:18–22:15), various interpersonal relationships (22:16–23:9), and Sabbaths, feasts, and the offering of firstfruits (23:10-19). Many of the judgments would not take effect until Israel settled in the Promised Land. Accordingly, that section of the Law closes with a solemn warning against being rebellious and adopting pagan ways. It also contains a bright promise that God will drive out Israel’s enemies, protect his people from sickness, and grant them prosperity, if they obey the Lord’s commands (23:22).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 24 records a reaffirmation of the covenant between God and Israel, as Moses seals it with the blood of a sacrifice. In response, God appears to the leaders of the people, giving them a glimpse of his splendor. Then Moses ascends the mountain one more time to receive the stone tablets containing the commandments, as well as further instructions regarding the meeting tent (tabernacle), the priesthood, and worship.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Presence with his People (Ex 25–40)<\/h5>\n<p>After the Lord redeemed the Israelites, he told Moses, “I will make you my own special people, and I will be your God. And you will know that I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God who has rescued you from your slavery in Egypt” (6:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses had seen that wonderful promise fulfilled, yet one further step remained: “I want the people of Israel to build me a sacred residence where I can live among them” (25:8). God’s dwelling among his people is possible because God had descended to deliver the people and because they had pledged to meet his demands. God calls for a contribution from all whose hearts were willing to give, and he shows Moses a detailed pattern of the tabernacle and its furniture. Aaron and his sons are set apart to serve in the tent. Stipulations for the various offerings, including the Day of Atonement, are given. God tells Moses that he has chosen Bezalel and Oholiab to build the tabernacle and to craft its furnishings, having filled them with his Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime the Israelites, who so recently promised total obedience, grow impatient as Moses lingers for 40 days on the mountain. They demand that Aaron make an idol for them. Under pressure, Aaron complies and forms a molten calf, a representation of a pagan deity (32:4).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord informs Moses of the people’s idolatry, revelry, and immorality and says that he is angry enough to destroy all of them and start again with Moses’ offspring. Moses pleads for Israel until the Lord relents, then descends from the mountain to punish the people. Moses pleads again for forgiveness for Israel, and God in mercy pardons their terrible sin (34:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Once more God offers to make a covenant with the people (34:10). Moses spends another 40 days with the Lord, writing the commandments on tablets to replace those smashed when he saw the golden calf. When he returns to the people, his face shines from being in God’s presence, and he must keep it veiled.<\/p>\n<p>Now that Israel has been restored to God’s favor, the construction of the tabernacle can begin. The contributions are so generous that Moses must restrain the people from bringing any more. Finally, all is ready. Moses examines the tabernacle, and it is erected on the first day of the first month, nearly a year after the first Passover. The priests are consecrated, the lamps are lit, and the first burnt sacrifice is offered. A cloud descends, filling the tabernacle with the glory of the Lord. God dwells among his people, the goal of redemption has been attained, and the drama of the book of Exodus has come to an end.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Israel, History of; Moses; Plagues upon Egypt; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EXODUS, Book of Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus. Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives ...","summary_en":"EXODUS, Book of Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus. Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16764,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Hosea","title_en":"Book of Hosea","content_ro":"<h3>HOSEA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the 12 minor prophets in the traditional arrangements of the OT books. It was written in the last part of the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>. Hosea’s prophecies were proclaimed to the northern kingdom of Israel in the final years of its existence. Hosea was the only prophet to reside in the northern kingdom and also to preach there. God commissioned Hosea to reveal the widespread apostasy and corruption in the northern kingdom and to exhort his fellow countrymen to repent and return to God. Hosea had the unique privilege of illustrating—in his own life—the steadfast covenant love that God had for Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Authenticity<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Origin and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Message<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Hosea’s ministry extended over a period of at least 38 years (c. 753–715 <span>BC<\/span>), and he appears as a knowledgeable individual, whether he was a peasant or a member of the wealthier class in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Hosea’s marriage to the prostitute Gomer may have been controversial in his own day, and it has certainly caused a great deal of controversy among Bible students and commentators. It seems best to recognize that Gomer was a publicly known harlot whom Hosea was commanded to marry for the purpose of illustrating Israel’s apostasy and God’s steadfast covenant love.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Authenticity\">Authenticity<\/p>\n<p>The authenticity and unity of Hosea is not seriously questioned, even by higher criticism. But two areas of controversy are (1) passages that refer to Judah (e.g., 1:1, 7, 11; 4:15; 5:5, 10-14; 6:4, 11; 8:14; 11:12; 12:2), and (2) those sections that refer to future blessing or national deliverance (e.g., 11:8-11; 14:2-9).<\/p>\n<p>Hosea’s references to Judah, however, could be expected from a man of God chagrined by the separation of Israel from the legitimate Davidic line. The northern kingdom, with its ungodly kings, was on the verge of judgment from God. Hosea evidently had received divine revelation concerning his dealings with Judah as well as Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The references to the future blessings and deliverance of Israel do not neutralize the condemnation of the sins of Israel, any more than Hosea’s constant love for and reconciliation with adulterous Gomer neutralizes her sin. Restoration and forgiveness need not ignore guilt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Hosea lived during the prosperous days of the northern kingdom of Israel under Jeroboam II (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>). He also saw its defeat and the deportation of its people after the invasion by the Assyrians (722 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In Hosea 1:1 the following kings are named: from the southern kingdom of Judah—Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah; and from the northern kingdom of Israel—Joash and Jeroboam. Uzziah was a contemporary of both Joash and Jeroboam. Ahaz was king of Judah when Israel was taken captive by Assyria. Hezekiah may have been a co-regent with Ahaz at the time of the Assyrian captivity.<\/p>\n<p>Jeroboam reigned over Israel for 41 years and followed the evil example of his father, Nebat (2 Kgs 14:23-24). Though Israel was prosperous and successful during Jeroboam’s reign, the corruption in the government and the degeneracy in the spiritual lives of the people set the stage for more tumultuous times in the days of subsequent kings and paved the way for the fall of Israel. The rich landowners (including the king) oppressed the peasants and caused the lower-class landowners to migrate from the farms to the cities. The social repercussions were soon to engulf Israel in a wave of corruption. Anarchy was a product of those times (Hos 4:1-2; 7:1-7; 8:3-4; 9:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Hosea’s prophetic ministry commenced with the reign of Jeroboam II (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>) and extended to that of Hezekiah of Judah (715–686 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Several factors indicate that Hosea continued prophesying under Hoshea of Israel (732–722 <span>BC<\/span>): (1) “Shalman” (Hos 10:14) may be Shalmaneser of Assyria, who invaded Israel early in the reign of Hoshea (2 Kgs 17:3). (2) “Jareb” (Hos 5:13; 10:6, both <span>kjv<\/span>) may be Sargon II (722–705 <span>BC<\/span>). (3) Predictions of the Assyrian invasion appear to refer to an imminent event (10:5-6; 13:15-16). (4) Mention of Egypt and Israel’s dependence on that nation seem to fit the reign of Hoshea (7:11; 11:11). These factors confirm that the compilation of Hosea’s messages may have taken place very near to the time of Israel’s fall (722 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginandDestination\">Origin and Destination<\/p>\n<p>Hosea prophesied while residing in Israel. He refers to the king in Samaria as “our king” (Hos 7:5). His descriptions of Israel show that he was familiar with the geography of the northern kingdom. Gilead is mentioned by Hosea as though he knew that area from personal observation (6:8; 12:11). Hosea was probably the only prophet to the northern kingdom who actually lived there throughout his ministry.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Hosea proclaimed to Israel the need to repent and return to God. He presented the God of Israel as a patient and loving God who remained faithful to his covenant promises. This emphasis is characteristic of Hosea (cf. 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>“Loving-kindness” is the word that best represents the covenant faithfulness and love of Yahweh, and Hosea’s family life was a living illustration of that loving-kindness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The major divisions and topics of the book of Hosea may be outlined as follows.<\/p>\n<p>The first three chapters of Hosea are concerned with the example of Hosea’s life, stressing Hosea’s faithfulness and love for his unfaithful wife.<\/p>\n<p>God commanded Hosea to marry the harlot Gomer and to have children by her (1:2–3:5). This command has caused difficulties for some commentators, since priests and prophets in Israel simply did not marry prostitutes. Medieval Jewish writers, therefore, regarded the material as symbolic but unhistorical. Some later scholars drew a distinction between chapters 1 and 3, regarding the latter as an intimate description by Hosea of his marriage; the first chapter was held to contain rather general recollections of his early days as a prophet. Other commentators regarded both chapters as literal fact, while certain scholars thought that chapter 1 was historical whereas chapter 3 represented an allegorical interpretation of the marriage by Hosea himself.<\/p>\n<p>Needless to say, the sexual activities of Gomer have also been discussed widely. Two views predominate. (1) Gomer was a faithful wife to Hosea in their early years of marriage. “A wife of harlotry” (1:2, <span>rsv<\/span>), which is not the common term for “prostitute,” has reference to her sinful and wayward nature, which God later caused to be exposed as an illustration of Israel’s idolatry. (2) Gomer was a publicly known harlot whom Hosea was commanded to marry in order to illustrate Israel’s idolatry and God’s faithful and steadfast love. This latter view seems to have the greatest appeal to evangelical scholars, and is the simplest interpretation within a literal, grammatical, and historical framework of Bible interpretation.<\/p>\n<p>Why it was necessary for her to be ransomed by Hosea is not evident, nor is it known why part of the price was paid in grain and the remainder in money. Perhaps the entire transaction was meant to symbolize God’s deliverance of Israel from future exile, although as far as it is known, the 10 northern tribes did not return from exile in Assyria. Such an interpretation could hardly apply to Judah, since Hosea’s message was not directed at the southern kingdom, although Judah did receive a warning (6:11).<\/p>\n<p>The children born to Hosea and Gomer were given symbolic names. The first child was a son named Jezreel (1:4a), signifying God’s judgment on the house of Jehu for Jehu’s slaughter of the house of Ahab in the valley of Jezreel (2 Kgs 10:1-11, 30).<\/p>\n<p>Lo-ruhamah was the second child (Hos 1:6a), whose name means “not compassioned or pitied.” The judgment of Israel was thus symbolized. The spiritual corruption of the northern kingdom had run its course, and it would be defeated and taken away into captivity (1:6b).<\/p>\n<p>Lo-ammi was the third child, a second son, whose name means “not my people” (1:8-9). This rejection of Israel as God’s covenanted people was to be temporary (1:10–2:1). God’s covenant promises to Abraham (cf. 1:10; Gn 22:17) and to Moses (Ex 19:1-7) would be fulfilled in spite of the disobedience of any particular generation.<\/p>\n<p>Not satisfied with her relationship to her husband, Gomer sought other lovers. Israel pursued the same elusive satisfaction in her flirtation and adultery with heathen deities. The good that their merciful God had bestowed upon them they attributed to pagan gods (Hos 2:8, 12). Repentant Israelites would return to their first love after discovering that there was no lasting satisfaction in their season of sin.<\/p>\n<p>Hosea’s declaration of divorce from Gomer for her adultery depicts Yahweh’s divorce from Israel for her adultery (Hos 2:2; cf. Jer 3:1–4:2). Their children represent the individual members of the nation of Israel in Hosea’s day (Hos 2:2-5).<\/p>\n<p>The illustration of restoration in chapter 3 highlights a concise summary of Israel’s history. Israel’s bondage to sin and Satan (cf. Heb 2:14-15) is symbolized by the price paid by Hosea for Gomer (Hos 3:2). The price was that of a female slave, since Gomer had become the slave of her adultery (cf. Ex 21:32). The days of Gomer’s isolation, like the days of Israel’s exile, were established for cleansing (Hos 3:3; cf. Dt 21:13; 30:2).<\/p>\n<p>After the exile period (“afterward”), and “in the latter days,” Israel will return to her husband to enjoy the blessings of the renewed relationship. In a messianic reference, David “their king” will be resurrected to lead Israel to the Lord (Hos 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>The last major section of Hosea deals in detail with what has already been illustrated and briefly explained in chapters 1–3. Israel’s apostasy (4:1–7:16), punishment (8:1–10:15), and restoration (11:1–14:9) are prophesied by Hosea.<\/p>\n<p>Israel was totally given over to ungodly activities and had separated itself from God (4:1-2; cf. Ex 20:1-17). The people had rejected the word of God through their own indifference and the deception of the priests (Hos 4:6-9; cf. Is 5:13; Am 8:11-12; Zep 1:6). Israel followed the example of corrupt spiritual leaders in the same way her kings followed the corrupt leadership of their predecessors (Hos 4:9). In place of God’s word, Israel turned to idolatry and divination for guidance (vv 12-13). Finally, Israel lost its priestly character (4:6; cf. Ex 19:6) because the priests were chiefly responsible for national apostasy (Hos 5:1).<\/p>\n<p>Upon revealing his case against the northern kingdom, God then issues a caution (5:8-14). The trumpet will be raised in the hills of Benjamin (v 8), the buffer zone between Israel and Judah. The alarm in that region will indicate that Israel is being overrun and Judah is endangered (vv 9-12). The northern kingdom had depended upon the commandment of man, not God (v 11). Israel had turned to Assyria for aid but received treachery and defeat at its hands (v 13). In this prophecy of the fall of Israel to the Assyrians (722 <span>BC<\/span>), Hosea depicts God as the ultimate chastiser (v 14).<\/p>\n<p>God’s call for repentance comes hard upon the heels of the revelation of chastisement (5:15–6:3). (The division of chapters at this point is unfortunate. Hosea 6:1-3 belongs with 5:15.) The exhortation to return to Yahweh could have been Hosea’s own heart response to the revelation he had received. However, it is best to take 6:1-3 as the words employed by the future returning remnant. Assyria did not offer healing, nor would any other nation, but God will heal Israel spiritually, politically, and physically (6:1; cf. Ex 15:26; Dt 32:39; Is 53:5; Ez 37:1-14; Mal 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>After the call to repentance, God returns to his concern for Israel (Hos 6:4-11; cf. 4:15). Israel has turned from its Creator and has disobeyed his message (6:7). Gilead is but one example of the murderous character of Israel (v 8). Even the priests are known for their violence (6:9; cf. 1 Sm 2:12-17; Jer 5:31). The sin of Israel is “horrible” (Hos 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 7 presents God’s conclusion concerning Israel. Every attempt of God to bring Israel to repentance only reveals more fully the extent of their sin (7:1). They believe they can sin without God taking account (Hos 7:2; cf. Ps 90:8; Mt 12:36-37). Their leaders rejoice that the people are as wicked as the king and the princes themselves (Hos 7:3). All Israel is characterized by habitual adultery (v 4). Israel has not separated itself from the heathen (Hos 7:8; cf. Ex 34:12-16; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1). Like “a cake not turned” (Hos 7:8), Israel is not well balanced spiritually or politically but has one side done to a turn and the other side raw.<\/p>\n<p>In the area of foreign affairs, Israel has flitted about from Egypt to Assyria and back again “like a silly dove” without understanding (Hos 7:11). They did not seek the Lord’s counsel in their time of need but depended upon worldly powers. The lack of faith in Yahweh and the lack of separation from sin will bring chastisement from God (Hos 7:12; cf. 1 Cor 11:32; Heb 12:5-15).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 8 deals with Israel’s reaping of judgment (cf. Hos 8:7). An alarm is sounded to warn the people of the approach of the Assyrians (Hos 8:1; cf. Ez 17:2-21). They would come against Israel (Hos 8:1) because of their transgression of the Sinai covenant (cf. Dt 27:9–29:29) and disobedience to the law of Moses. Crying falsely to God for deliverance from his rod of punishment (cf. Is 10:5), Israel will receive no answer and Assyria will continue to pursue the 10 tribes (Hos 8:2-3). Other reasons for God’s judgment include setting up kings without God’s direction (v 4a) and idolatry (vv 4b-6). Israel’s sacrifices were unacceptable because of the nation’s disobedience (cf. 1 Sm 15:22; Is 1:11-15). Thus they would go into exile just like the earlier exile in Egypt (Hos 8:13).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of exile is continued in chapter 9 of Hosea. There is no joy for Israel (v 1). The produce of the land will not sustain her because she will no longer dwell in the land (vv 2-3). Some Israelites will flee to Egypt in exile, while others will be taken captive to Assyria. All the sacrifices will cease and the sacrificial wines and meats will be drunk and eaten to satisfy their own needs (vv 4-5). Those Israelites who flee to Egypt will be slain by the Egyptians (v 6).<\/p>\n<p>The recompense of Israel’s evil is further described in chapter 10. Israel is like a luxuriant vine (10:1), but its bounty is misappropriated, being poured out as sacrifice on heathen altars. They are guilty before God, and he is about to destroy their altars and take away their king (vv 2-3). Gibeah is mentioned again (cf. 9:9), reminding Israel that apostasy is not only infectious, it is also indelible (10:9). The “two crimes” (<span>njb<\/span>) of verse 10 may refer to the two calf idols in Bethel and Dan that brought chastisement from God. The punishment will be a sentence of hard labor under a heavy yoke (v 11).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 11 through 14 close the prophecies of Hosea with a message concerning the restoration of Israel at a future time. The steadfast love of the Father is first given as the ground of future restoration (11:1-12). Israel, as a nation, had been called out of Egypt as a son of Yahweh (Hos 11:1; cf. Ex 4:22-23). Yet Israel did not return the Father’s love, but sought pagan alliances (Hos 11:5) that would only bring judgment upon them (vv 5-7). The words of Yahweh reveal his irreversible judgment in his absolute holiness and righteousness (12:1–13:16). The sins of Israel can only be responded to with just recompense (12:1-2). The responsibility for the destruction of the northern kingdom rests upon Israel herself. In spite of Israel’s sin, God can yet be her help (13:9).<\/p>\n<p>Israel should have repented quickly, but she did not (13:13). Yet the mercy of Yahweh would ultimately bring about the death of death itself so that Israel might live—spiritually, politically, and perhaps physically (Hos 13:14; cf. Ez 37:1-14; Dn 12:1-2, 13).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 14 of Hosea sets forth the Father’s loving invitation for Israel to repent and return to him in confession, prayer, and praise (Hos 14:2). “Calves of our lips” (v 2, <span>kjv<\/span>) refers to the thank offering, which normally included young bulls (Ex 24:5; Lv 7:11-15; cf. Pss 51:17-19; 69:30-31; Heb 13:15-16). Part of Israel’s confession will involve recognizing that there is no salvation in either Assyria (political alliance) or idols (Hos 14:3).<\/p>\n<p>God repeatedly promises blessing to Israel in their restoration (note “I will,” 14:4-5). Yahweh will heal Israel spiritually, love them freely, prosper them completely, and protect them fully (vv 4-7). Israel will be as beautiful as the lily, durable as the cedar, and fruitful as the olive tree.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Message\">Message<\/p>\n<p>The primary emphasis of Hosea is summarized in the last verse (14:9). The wise will live godly lives, and the foolish will live ungodly lives. The godly will have restoration, victory over death (13:14), and blessing (14:4-7).<\/p>\n<p>Idolatry is essentially anything that usurps the sole place of God in the human heart. In place of Yahweh’s counsel, aid, blessing, and salvation, Israel had substituted heathen deities (4:12-19), national pride (5:5), religious ceremony (6:6), political expediency (7:3), political alliances (7:11), civil government (8:4), building projects (8:14), selfish affluence (10:1), and idolatry (13:2). Only in God could they find true blessing and security (13:4, 9; 14:4-7).<\/p>\n<p>Apostasy is presented by Hosea as infectious. The cycle of apostasy may begin with the spiritual leaders or with the people and spread from one to the other (4:9). Apostasy is punished according to the degree of responsibility (5:1; 13:9; 14:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hosea (Person); Israel, History of; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HOSEA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the 12 minor prophets in the traditional arrangements of the OT books. It was written in the last part of the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>. Hosea’s prophecies were proclaimed to the northern kingdom of Israel in the final years of its existence. Hosea was the only prophet to reside in the northern kingdom and also to preach there. God commissioned Hosea to reveal the widespread apostasy and corruption in the northern kingdom and to exhort his fellow countrymen to repent and return to God. Hosea had the unique privilege of illustrating—in his own life—the steadfast covenant love that God had for Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Authenticity<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Origin and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Message<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Hosea’s ministry extended over a period of at least 38 years (c. 753–715 <span>BC<\/span>), and he appears as a knowledgeable individual, whether he was a peasant or a member of the wealthier class in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Hosea’s marriage to the prostitute Gomer may have been controversial in his own day, and it has certainly caused a great deal of controversy among Bible students and commentators. It seems best to recognize that Gomer was a publicly known harlot whom Hosea was commanded to marry for the purpose of illustrating Israel’s apostasy and God’s steadfast covenant love.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Authenticity\">Authenticity<\/p>\n<p>The authenticity and unity of Hosea is not seriously questioned, even by higher criticism. But two areas of controversy are (1) passages that refer to Judah (e.g., 1:1, 7, 11; 4:15; 5:5, 10-14; 6:4, 11; 8:14; 11:12; 12:2), and (2) those sections that refer to future blessing or national deliverance (e.g., 11:8-11; 14:2-9).<\/p>\n<p>Hosea’s references to Judah, however, could be expected from a man of God chagrined by the separation of Israel from the legitimate Davidic line. The northern kingdom, with its ungodly kings, was on the verge of judgment from God. Hosea evidently had received divine revelation concerning his dealings with Judah as well as Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The references to the future blessings and deliverance of Israel do not neutralize the condemnation of the sins of Israel, any more than Hosea’s constant love for and reconciliation with adulterous Gomer neutralizes her sin. Restoration and forgiveness need not ignore guilt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Hosea lived during the prosperous days of the northern kingdom of Israel under Jeroboam II (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>). He also saw its defeat and the deportation of its people after the invasion by the Assyrians (722 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In Hosea 1:1 the following kings are named: from the southern kingdom of Judah—Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah; and from the northern kingdom of Israel—Joash and Jeroboam. Uzziah was a contemporary of both Joash and Jeroboam. Ahaz was king of Judah when Israel was taken captive by Assyria. Hezekiah may have been a co-regent with Ahaz at the time of the Assyrian captivity.<\/p>\n<p>Jeroboam reigned over Israel for 41 years and followed the evil example of his father, Nebat (2 Kgs 14:23-24). Though Israel was prosperous and successful during Jeroboam’s reign, the corruption in the government and the degeneracy in the spiritual lives of the people set the stage for more tumultuous times in the days of subsequent kings and paved the way for the fall of Israel. The rich landowners (including the king) oppressed the peasants and caused the lower-class landowners to migrate from the farms to the cities. The social repercussions were soon to engulf Israel in a wave of corruption. Anarchy was a product of those times (Hos 4:1-2; 7:1-7; 8:3-4; 9:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Hosea’s prophetic ministry commenced with the reign of Jeroboam II (793–753 <span>BC<\/span>) and extended to that of Hezekiah of Judah (715–686 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Several factors indicate that Hosea continued prophesying under Hoshea of Israel (732–722 <span>BC<\/span>): (1) “Shalman” (Hos 10:14) may be Shalmaneser of Assyria, who invaded Israel early in the reign of Hoshea (2 Kgs 17:3). (2) “Jareb” (Hos 5:13; 10:6, both <span>kjv<\/span>) may be Sargon II (722–705 <span>BC<\/span>). (3) Predictions of the Assyrian invasion appear to refer to an imminent event (10:5-6; 13:15-16). (4) Mention of Egypt and Israel’s dependence on that nation seem to fit the reign of Hoshea (7:11; 11:11). These factors confirm that the compilation of Hosea’s messages may have taken place very near to the time of Israel’s fall (722 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginandDestination\">Origin and Destination<\/p>\n<p>Hosea prophesied while residing in Israel. He refers to the king in Samaria as “our king” (Hos 7:5). His descriptions of Israel show that he was familiar with the geography of the northern kingdom. Gilead is mentioned by Hosea as though he knew that area from personal observation (6:8; 12:11). Hosea was probably the only prophet to the northern kingdom who actually lived there throughout his ministry.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Hosea proclaimed to Israel the need to repent and return to God. He presented the God of Israel as a patient and loving God who remained faithful to his covenant promises. This emphasis is characteristic of Hosea (cf. 2:19).<\/p>\n<p>“Loving-kindness” is the word that best represents the covenant faithfulness and love of Yahweh, and Hosea’s family life was a living illustration of that loving-kindness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The major divisions and topics of the book of Hosea may be outlined as follows.<\/p>\n<p>The first three chapters of Hosea are concerned with the example of Hosea’s life, stressing Hosea’s faithfulness and love for his unfaithful wife.<\/p>\n<p>God commanded Hosea to marry the harlot Gomer and to have children by her (1:2–3:5). This command has caused difficulties for some commentators, since priests and prophets in Israel simply did not marry prostitutes. Medieval Jewish writers, therefore, regarded the material as symbolic but unhistorical. Some later scholars drew a distinction between chapters 1 and 3, regarding the latter as an intimate description by Hosea of his marriage; the first chapter was held to contain rather general recollections of his early days as a prophet. Other commentators regarded both chapters as literal fact, while certain scholars thought that chapter 1 was historical whereas chapter 3 represented an allegorical interpretation of the marriage by Hosea himself.<\/p>\n<p>Needless to say, the sexual activities of Gomer have also been discussed widely. Two views predominate. (1) Gomer was a faithful wife to Hosea in their early years of marriage. “A wife of harlotry” (1:2, <span>rsv<\/span>), which is not the common term for “prostitute,” has reference to her sinful and wayward nature, which God later caused to be exposed as an illustration of Israel’s idolatry. (2) Gomer was a publicly known harlot whom Hosea was commanded to marry in order to illustrate Israel’s idolatry and God’s faithful and steadfast love. This latter view seems to have the greatest appeal to evangelical scholars, and is the simplest interpretation within a literal, grammatical, and historical framework of Bible interpretation.<\/p>\n<p>Why it was necessary for her to be ransomed by Hosea is not evident, nor is it known why part of the price was paid in grain and the remainder in money. Perhaps the entire transaction was meant to symbolize God’s deliverance of Israel from future exile, although as far as it is known, the 10 northern tribes did not return from exile in Assyria. Such an interpretation could hardly apply to Judah, since Hosea’s message was not directed at the southern kingdom, although Judah did receive a warning (6:11).<\/p>\n<p>The children born to Hosea and Gomer were given symbolic names. The first child was a son named Jezreel (1:4a), signifying God’s judgment on the house of Jehu for Jehu’s slaughter of the house of Ahab in the valley of Jezreel (2 Kgs 10:1-11, 30).<\/p>\n<p>Lo-ruhamah was the second child (Hos 1:6a), whose name means “not compassioned or pitied.” The judgment of Israel was thus symbolized. The spiritual corruption of the northern kingdom had run its course, and it would be defeated and taken away into captivity (1:6b).<\/p>\n<p>Lo-ammi was the third child, a second son, whose name means “not my people” (1:8-9). This rejection of Israel as God’s covenanted people was to be temporary (1:10–2:1). God’s covenant promises to Abraham (cf. 1:10; Gn 22:17) and to Moses (Ex 19:1-7) would be fulfilled in spite of the disobedience of any particular generation.<\/p>\n<p>Not satisfied with her relationship to her husband, Gomer sought other lovers. Israel pursued the same elusive satisfaction in her flirtation and adultery with heathen deities. The good that their merciful God had bestowed upon them they attributed to pagan gods (Hos 2:8, 12). Repentant Israelites would return to their first love after discovering that there was no lasting satisfaction in their season of sin.<\/p>\n<p>Hosea’s declaration of divorce from Gomer for her adultery depicts Yahweh’s divorce from Israel for her adultery (Hos 2:2; cf. Jer 3:1–4:2). Their children represent the individual members of the nation of Israel in Hosea’s day (Hos 2:2-5).<\/p>\n<p>The illustration of restoration in chapter 3 highlights a concise summary of Israel’s history. Israel’s bondage to sin and Satan (cf. Heb 2:14-15) is symbolized by the price paid by Hosea for Gomer (Hos 3:2). The price was that of a female slave, since Gomer had become the slave of her adultery (cf. Ex 21:32). The days of Gomer’s isolation, like the days of Israel’s exile, were established for cleansing (Hos 3:3; cf. Dt 21:13; 30:2).<\/p>\n<p>After the exile period (“afterward”), and “in the latter days,” Israel will return to her husband to enjoy the blessings of the renewed relationship. In a messianic reference, David “their king” will be resurrected to lead Israel to the Lord (Hos 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>The last major section of Hosea deals in detail with what has already been illustrated and briefly explained in chapters 1–3. Israel’s apostasy (4:1–7:16), punishment (8:1–10:15), and restoration (11:1–14:9) are prophesied by Hosea.<\/p>\n<p>Israel was totally given over to ungodly activities and had separated itself from God (4:1-2; cf. Ex 20:1-17). The people had rejected the word of God through their own indifference and the deception of the priests (Hos 4:6-9; cf. Is 5:13; Am 8:11-12; Zep 1:6). Israel followed the example of corrupt spiritual leaders in the same way her kings followed the corrupt leadership of their predecessors (Hos 4:9). In place of God’s word, Israel turned to idolatry and divination for guidance (vv 12-13). Finally, Israel lost its priestly character (4:6; cf. Ex 19:6) because the priests were chiefly responsible for national apostasy (Hos 5:1).<\/p>\n<p>Upon revealing his case against the northern kingdom, God then issues a caution (5:8-14). The trumpet will be raised in the hills of Benjamin (v 8), the buffer zone between Israel and Judah. The alarm in that region will indicate that Israel is being overrun and Judah is endangered (vv 9-12). The northern kingdom had depended upon the commandment of man, not God (v 11). Israel had turned to Assyria for aid but received treachery and defeat at its hands (v 13). In this prophecy of the fall of Israel to the Assyrians (722 <span>BC<\/span>), Hosea depicts God as the ultimate chastiser (v 14).<\/p>\n<p>God’s call for repentance comes hard upon the heels of the revelation of chastisement (5:15–6:3). (The division of chapters at this point is unfortunate. Hosea 6:1-3 belongs with 5:15.) The exhortation to return to Yahweh could have been Hosea’s own heart response to the revelation he had received. However, it is best to take 6:1-3 as the words employed by the future returning remnant. Assyria did not offer healing, nor would any other nation, but God will heal Israel spiritually, politically, and physically (6:1; cf. Ex 15:26; Dt 32:39; Is 53:5; Ez 37:1-14; Mal 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>After the call to repentance, God returns to his concern for Israel (Hos 6:4-11; cf. 4:15). Israel has turned from its Creator and has disobeyed his message (6:7). Gilead is but one example of the murderous character of Israel (v 8). Even the priests are known for their violence (6:9; cf. 1 Sm 2:12-17; Jer 5:31). The sin of Israel is “horrible” (Hos 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 7 presents God’s conclusion concerning Israel. Every attempt of God to bring Israel to repentance only reveals more fully the extent of their sin (7:1). They believe they can sin without God taking account (Hos 7:2; cf. Ps 90:8; Mt 12:36-37). Their leaders rejoice that the people are as wicked as the king and the princes themselves (Hos 7:3). All Israel is characterized by habitual adultery (v 4). Israel has not separated itself from the heathen (Hos 7:8; cf. Ex 34:12-16; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1). Like “a cake not turned” (Hos 7:8), Israel is not well balanced spiritually or politically but has one side done to a turn and the other side raw.<\/p>\n<p>In the area of foreign affairs, Israel has flitted about from Egypt to Assyria and back again “like a silly dove” without understanding (Hos 7:11). They did not seek the Lord’s counsel in their time of need but depended upon worldly powers. The lack of faith in Yahweh and the lack of separation from sin will bring chastisement from God (Hos 7:12; cf. 1 Cor 11:32; Heb 12:5-15).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 8 deals with Israel’s reaping of judgment (cf. Hos 8:7). An alarm is sounded to warn the people of the approach of the Assyrians (Hos 8:1; cf. Ez 17:2-21). They would come against Israel (Hos 8:1) because of their transgression of the Sinai covenant (cf. Dt 27:9–29:29) and disobedience to the law of Moses. Crying falsely to God for deliverance from his rod of punishment (cf. Is 10:5), Israel will receive no answer and Assyria will continue to pursue the 10 tribes (Hos 8:2-3). Other reasons for God’s judgment include setting up kings without God’s direction (v 4a) and idolatry (vv 4b-6). Israel’s sacrifices were unacceptable because of the nation’s disobedience (cf. 1 Sm 15:22; Is 1:11-15). Thus they would go into exile just like the earlier exile in Egypt (Hos 8:13).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of exile is continued in chapter 9 of Hosea. There is no joy for Israel (v 1). The produce of the land will not sustain her because she will no longer dwell in the land (vv 2-3). Some Israelites will flee to Egypt in exile, while others will be taken captive to Assyria. All the sacrifices will cease and the sacrificial wines and meats will be drunk and eaten to satisfy their own needs (vv 4-5). Those Israelites who flee to Egypt will be slain by the Egyptians (v 6).<\/p>\n<p>The recompense of Israel’s evil is further described in chapter 10. Israel is like a luxuriant vine (10:1), but its bounty is misappropriated, being poured out as sacrifice on heathen altars. They are guilty before God, and he is about to destroy their altars and take away their king (vv 2-3). Gibeah is mentioned again (cf. 9:9), reminding Israel that apostasy is not only infectious, it is also indelible (10:9). The “two crimes” (<span>njb<\/span>) of verse 10 may refer to the two calf idols in Bethel and Dan that brought chastisement from God. The punishment will be a sentence of hard labor under a heavy yoke (v 11).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 11 through 14 close the prophecies of Hosea with a message concerning the restoration of Israel at a future time. The steadfast love of the Father is first given as the ground of future restoration (11:1-12). Israel, as a nation, had been called out of Egypt as a son of Yahweh (Hos 11:1; cf. Ex 4:22-23). Yet Israel did not return the Father’s love, but sought pagan alliances (Hos 11:5) that would only bring judgment upon them (vv 5-7). The words of Yahweh reveal his irreversible judgment in his absolute holiness and righteousness (12:1–13:16). The sins of Israel can only be responded to with just recompense (12:1-2). The responsibility for the destruction of the northern kingdom rests upon Israel herself. In spite of Israel’s sin, God can yet be her help (13:9).<\/p>\n<p>Israel should have repented quickly, but she did not (13:13). Yet the mercy of Yahweh would ultimately bring about the death of death itself so that Israel might live—spiritually, politically, and perhaps physically (Hos 13:14; cf. Ez 37:1-14; Dn 12:1-2, 13).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 14 of Hosea sets forth the Father’s loving invitation for Israel to repent and return to him in confession, prayer, and praise (Hos 14:2). “Calves of our lips” (v 2, <span>kjv<\/span>) refers to the thank offering, which normally included young bulls (Ex 24:5; Lv 7:11-15; cf. Pss 51:17-19; 69:30-31; Heb 13:15-16). Part of Israel’s confession will involve recognizing that there is no salvation in either Assyria (political alliance) or idols (Hos 14:3).<\/p>\n<p>God repeatedly promises blessing to Israel in their restoration (note “I will,” 14:4-5). Yahweh will heal Israel spiritually, love them freely, prosper them completely, and protect them fully (vv 4-7). Israel will be as beautiful as the lily, durable as the cedar, and fruitful as the olive tree.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Message\">Message<\/p>\n<p>The primary emphasis of Hosea is summarized in the last verse (14:9). The wise will live godly lives, and the foolish will live ungodly lives. The godly will have restoration, victory over death (13:14), and blessing (14:4-7).<\/p>\n<p>Idolatry is essentially anything that usurps the sole place of God in the human heart. In place of Yahweh’s counsel, aid, blessing, and salvation, Israel had substituted heathen deities (4:12-19), national pride (5:5), religious ceremony (6:6), political expediency (7:3), political alliances (7:11), civil government (8:4), building projects (8:14), selfish affluence (10:1), and idolatry (13:2). Only in God could they find true blessing and security (13:4, 9; 14:4-7).<\/p>\n<p>Apostasy is presented by Hosea as infectious. The cycle of apostasy may begin with the spiritual leaders or with the people and spread from one to the other (4:9). Apostasy is punished according to the degree of responsibility (5:1; 13:9; 14:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Hosea (Person); Israel, History of; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HOSEA, Book of First of the 12 minor prophets in the traditional arrangements of the OT books. It was written in the last part of the eighth century BC. Hosea’s prophecies were proclaimed to the northern kingdom of Israel in the final years of its existence. Hosea was the only prophet to reside in the northern kingdom and also to preach there. God commissioned Hosea to reveal the widespread apostasy and corruption in the northern kingdom and to exhort his fellow countrymen to repent and retur...","summary_en":"HOSEA, Book of First of the 12 minor prophets in the traditional arrangements of the OT books. It was written in the last part of the eighth century BC. Hosea’s prophecies were proclaimed to the northern kingdom of Israel in the final years of its existence. Hosea was the only prophet to reside in the northern kingdom and also to preach there. God commissioned Hosea to reveal the widespread apostasy and corruption in the northern kingdom and to exhort his fellow countrymen to repent and retur...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22706,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Biblical Concept of Law","title_en":"Biblical Concept of Law","content_ro":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalContext\">Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\n<p>Yet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, <span>niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\n<p>However, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LawintheOldTestament\">Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Torah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Synonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\n<p>These words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, <span>niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\n<p>How could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteLawandtheAncientNearEast\">Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLaws\">Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>The legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\n<p>The commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>The commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the <em>lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The <em>lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it <em>justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), <em>lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and <em>peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\n<p>God’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\n<p>By means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\n<p>The priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\n<p>The holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\n<p>The laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\n<p>The holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\n<p>Both promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposesoftheLaw\">Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\n<p>The law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\n<p>Maturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, <span>niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalContext\">Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\n<p>Yet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, <span>niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\n<p>However, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LawintheOldTestament\">Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Torah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Synonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\n<p>These words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, <span>niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\n<p>How could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteLawandtheAncientNearEast\">Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLaws\">Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>The legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\n<p>The commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>The commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the <em>lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The <em>lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it <em>justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), <em>lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and <em>peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\n<p>God’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\n<p>By means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\n<p>The priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\n<p>The holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\n<p>The laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\n<p>The holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\n<p>Both promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposesoftheLaw\">Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\n<p>The law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\n<p>Maturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, <span>niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","summary_en":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27704,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Numerology*, Numbers","title_en":"and Numerology*, Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern.<\/p>\n<p>Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mystical, pre-Christian Jewish groups, and later carried to extremes by the Kabbalists.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>• Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>• Numerology<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionofNumbers\">Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew, and indeed any other Semitic language, has a simple but adequate system of numeration. The number one is an adjective. After that, the numerals are nouns, in parallel masculine and feminine forms, although the masculine is used with the feminine noun and vice versa. Ordinal numbers (first, second, third, etc.) exist alongside cardinal numbers (one, two, three), but as in most languages, the second set can be used instead of the first (“day two” instead of “second day”). From ten to nineteen, there is one composite form built like English “thirteen” (“three-ten”), but “twenty” is literally “tens” (the plural of “ten”). Thirty, forty, and so on are literally “threes,” “fours” (the plural of the words “three” and “four,” respectively) and so on, up to a hundred, which is a new word. There are also separate words for “thousand” and for “ten thousand,” as in Greek, Chinese, and many other languages. Larger numbers must be expressed by multiples of these (“ten thousand times ten thousand” and “thousands of thousands”), suggesting that large figures, rarely needed for small populations and tiny kingdoms, were expressed approximately. Hebrew has not only a singular and plural but also a dual form to express two of anything (two hundred, two thousand). Fractions (a half, a third, a tenth, etc.) could be expressed, and multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction were used. Indeed, instances of all four operations can be found in the Bible. The Hebrew mathematical system was basically part of the larger western Asian mathematical system, of which we know a great deal from Mesopotamia and Egypt. These countries, however, used a more highly developed mathematical system than Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WaysofWritingNumerals\">Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible, numbers are always written out in words, as on the famous Moabite Stone and the Siloam Inscription. But every nation in the ancient world could also express numbers by using figures or ciphers of various kinds (like our 1, 2, 3, . . .). Because of this danger of error, in later days numbers were normally written out in full, in words, where confusion, although still possible, was not nearly so likely. An additional way of writing numbers, known both to the Hebrews and the Greeks, was the use of consecutive letters of the alphabet instead of consecutive numerals (as if we used A for 1, B for 2, etc.). This system, in wide use by NT times, is the usual system in modern Hebrew and has the advantage that numerical combinations can be pronounced by inserting arbitrary vowels, thus making artificial words. For example, if the number of the beast (Rv 13:18), 666, is expressed in alphabetical letters, it can spell out the consonants of “Nero Caesar,” although other names are possible, especially if the variant reading 616 is used.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofLargeNumbers\">Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Even allowing for all these possibilities, there remain certain problems connected with large numbers, particularly in the OT. The most obvious is that of the ten long-lived patriarchs, whose ages are recorded in Genesis 5. Different figures (varying by whole centuries) are recorded for their ages in the Hebrew text, the Samaritan text, and the earliest Greek translation (known as the Septuagint), but all figures are very large. Some interpret these figures literally and point out that there is a steady reduction from the ages attained by these patriarchs to the more modest 120 years allotted to man in Noah’s time (Gn 6:3) and the 70 years accepted later as the human life span (Ps 90:10). This would correspond to the progressive spiritual deterioration of mankind after the fall, from the perfect state of Adam to the present condition. Whatever the explanation of the figures, there is no doubt that this is the theological intent of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The large number of Israelites who left Egypt is also problematic. If there were actually 600,000 fighting men (Nm 1:46), this would correspond to a whole nation of some 2 million or more. Possibly the word translated “thousand” means “clan units”; it would clearly be a much smaller total body, whatever its exact size. Of course, God could have maintained any number of people in the desert. The evidence of archaeology as to the population of Canaan both before and after the Israelite onslaught seems to support a lower number. The same principle might explain the large numbers given for the fighting men of the various Israelite tribes, and the huge totals for Israel and Judah’s military strength given at later times in the historical books of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>To the ordinary Bible reader, perhaps one of the biggest problems is the different numbers recorded in Chronicles and Kings, when the same incidents are being described. Manuscript errors, or confusion of numbers written by signs or single letters of the alphabet, may account for numerous individual inconsistencies, but not for wholesale differences, particularly as the figures in Chronicles are consistently much larger. These very large round numbers may have symbolic significance and may not be intended to be taken in their literal sense at all. Indeed, since the Jews had before them the book of Kings and the book of Chronicles at the same time, they can hardly have taken both sets of numbers literally themselves.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CountingbyGenerations\">Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>One of the problems of the OT is that of the dating of events. Even with an exact number system, there is no absolute fixed point from which to reckon. Later Jews and Christians counted from the presumed date of the Creation. Not until after the time of David and Solomon are both internal reference between the comparative dates of kings of Judah and Israel and external reference to monarchs outside Israel used. This open-endedness accounts for the vague period of “forty years” used so often in the OT (e.g., the book of Judges) for any long but indeterminate period of time, almost certainly corresponding to a generation (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dor<\/span>). Counting by generations is specific in some places in the Bible and may be implicit in others. For instance, Abraham’s descendants are to return to Canaan “in the fourth generation” (Gn 15:16), and the genealogy of Christ is neatly constructed on a pattern of three groups of fourteen generations (Mt 1:17), rather than on periods of years. Wherever people use and recite genealogies, such counting by generations is natural. But Abraham’s descendants are said to have returned to Canaan approximately four centuries later (Gal 3:17), and therefore the word “generation” sometimes stands for 100 years. The Hebrew word for “generation” may mean 120 years (Gn 6:3). Usually, the ancient Hebrews used vague phrases like “in those days” or “after those days” or “the days are coming,” which expressed past, present, and future without any specific mention of number. In other words, the Bible writers were more concerned with theology than with mathematics.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApproximateUseofNumbers\">Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, Israel’s 40 years in the desert is a good example of the approximate use of numbers (Nm 14:33). In the NT, Jesus was in the wilderness 40 days during the temptation (Mt 4:2), and there were 40 days between his resurrection and ascension (Acts 1:3). Moses was 40 years old at his call (Acts 7:23), apparently lived 40 years in Midian (Ex 7:7), and spent 40 years leading Israel out of Egypt and through the desert (Dt 34:7), for he is said to be 120 years old at his death. However, two generations of 40 years is the normal maximum for a healthy man (Ps 90:10), and even this is often shortened to 70 years by the rigors of life. Seventy is also used at times in this approximate sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolicUseofNumbers\">Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, seven symbolizes completeness or perfection. On the seventh day God rested from his labors and creation is finished (Gn 2:2). Pharaoh in his dream saw seven cattle coming from the Nile (41:2). Samson’s sacred Nazirite locks were braided in seven plaits (Jgs 16:13). Seven devils left Mary of Magdala, signifying the totality of her previous possession by Satan (Lk 8:2); “seven other devils” will enter the purified but vacant life of a person (Mt 12:45). However, on the positive side, there were the seven spirits of God (Rv 3:1). In the seventh year the Hebrew slave was to be freed (Ex 21:2), having completed his time of captivity and service. Every seventh year was a sabbatical year (Lv 25:4). Seven times seven reiterates the sense of completeness. In the Year of Jubilee (at the completion of 7 x 7 years = the 50th year), all land is freed and returns to the original owners (Lv 25:10). Pentecost, the Feast of Weeks, is seven times seven days after Passover. “Seventy,” which is literally “sevens” in Hebrew, strengthens the concept of perfection. There are 70 elders (Ex 24:1) in Israel. Israel was exiled to Babylon for 70 years (Jer 25:12) to complete its punishment. “Seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) reiterates this still further. The Lord was not giving Peter a mathematical number of times that he should forgive another person, but rather was insisting on limitless forgiveness for a brother’s sin.<\/p>\n<p>“Three” may well share in this meaning of completion or perfection, although not so forcibly (2 Kgs 13:18). Many things happen “on the third day” (Hos 6:2). Jonah spent three days in the stomach of the fish (Mt 12:40), and the Lord rose again on the third day (1 Cor 15:4). David was offered a choice of divine punishments—three years, three months, three days (2 Sm 24:13). For the Christian, “three” takes on a far deeper significance as the number of Persons of the Trinity. The three Persons are clearly expressed, for instance, in the Great Commission (Mt 28:19) and in the Pauline benediction (2 Cor 13:13). Many echoes of this threefold expression are in the NT, and many anticipations of it in the OT, of which the thrice-repeated “Holy” in Isaiah 6:3 is the most famous.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars see four as another symbol of completeness (four winds of heaven, Dn 7:2; four horsemen, Rv 6:1-7; four living creatures around the throne of God, Rv 4:6). Five is certainly used in an indefinite sense as a small number (Is 19:18; 30:17). Nor do eight or nine seem to have any special significance, although, like other numbers, they may be used in a factual sense to describe any of God’s activities (nine plagues on Egypt, Ex 7–10). “Ten” does have significance because of the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1-17), but not any special symbolism earlier in the Bible. If anything, “ten” is elsewhere used in a vague way. Laban changes Jacob’s wages ten times (Gn 31:7); Daniel and his friends are ten times better than all other students (Dn 1:20); ten times over, the Jewish settlers will be warned of impending enemy attacks (Neh 4:12).<\/p>\n<p>Eleven appears to have no special biblical significance, but 12 certainly has. The clearest proof of this is the existence of the 12 tribes in Israel. In Revelation 7:4-8, where it is mathematically important that the number of tribes be limited to 12, the tribe of Dan is altogether omitted—probably on account of Dan’s sin of idolatry (Jgs 18:14-20). Ishmael’s descendants were also divided into 12 clans (Gn 17:20), so that the number 12 was apparently significant outside Israel as well. In the NT Christ chose 12 apostles (Mt 10:1-4). The link with the number of tribes is made specific when Christ tells the apostles that they will sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes (Mt 19:28). However, it is interesting that, after the election and appointment of Matthias (Acts 1:26), the Christian church apparently made no subsequent efforts to maintain the number of apostles. Like “seven times seven,” “twelve times twelve” increases the force of the number. When this is further multiplied by a thousand, the figure becomes the 144,000 redeemed (Rv 7:4), who were sealed “out of all the tribes of Israel.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExactStatistics\">Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>As distinct from the metaphorical use of numbers to denote completion, immensity, and the like, numbers in Hebrew were often used to give exact tallies or measurements. Such usage is known to us only from clay tablets and ostraca (broken pieces of potsherd engraved in ink, used as rough notebooks). However, ascertaining exactly what the text was in its earliest form and what that text means is difficult.<\/p>\n<p>An example is the number of the sons of Jeconiah among the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh. They were struck down by the Lord because of their failure to rejoice with the others when God’s ark returned to Israel from the Philistine country (1 Sm 6:19). The Greek text (LXX) reads “seventy”; the later Hebrew manuscripts add “fifty thousand.” But, as Beth-shemesh itself was only a small frontier town, and the “sons of Jeconiah” was presumably only one clan among several, the smaller number is obviously the original, and the large addition due to some later manuscript confusion.<\/p>\n<p>A good rule in trying to decide whether a number is statistical or impressionistic is to determine whether it is a small number, or an unusual number for which there is no obvious theological explanation. When the men of Ai killed some 36 Israelites at the first assault on the city (Jos 7:5), the smallness of the number is evidence that this is a vividly remembered factual detail. Similarly, in the case of the number of Abraham’s 318 men (Gn 14:14) or the catch of 153 fish after the resurrection (Jn 21:11), the numbers, though large, are not round numbers but unusual combinations, and are obviously meant in a literal or statistical sense. Irrelevant details like this have a habit of remaining in the memory, and are the best guarantee of the trustworthiness of the narrative.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Numerology\">Numerology<\/p>\n<p>Numerology may be said to be an extended application of the metaphorical significance of numbers (7, 40, etc.) already discussed. In the Bible, this systematization of numbers always goes with a strong sense of the sovereignty of God, his control over human history, and a belief in his ongoing purpose and its triumphant conclusion.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the first clear instance of numerology in the Bible is 1 Kings 6:1, where Solomon began to build the temple 480 years after the exodus, a period 5 times 10 times 12, or 4 times 120, the ideal life span of man in early days (Gn 6:3). First Chronicles 6:3-8 gives 12 generations of men (presumably 40 years each) to cover the same period, so “twelve generations” is probably the real basis for the computation, rather than any exact year-by-year tally. A tally would have been impossible in the days of the judges and unlikely before the monarchy. David was the first to establish an official scribe or recorder to keep daily annals in Israel (2 Sm 8:16-17), as was common in the great kingdoms from far earlier times. Such Israelite annals are later mentioned as sources of the books of the kings (2 Kgs 14:18). The number 480 is probably a rough approximation rather than exact and denotes the end of one of God’s epochs.<\/p>\n<p>When Jeremiah prophesies an exile of 70 years for Judah (Jer 25:11; 29:10), it is not only a historical prediction that was literally fulfilled but also a symbol of completeness; Judah’s punishment is complete (cf. Is 40:2). Isaiah (Is 23:15) had made a similar prophecy of a 70-year punishment for Tyre, and Ezekiel (Ez 29:11-13) prophesied a 40-year “exile” for Egypt. When these 70 years are regarded as sabbatical years, where the land must lie untilled to compensate for the 7 times 70 years of sin before, then true numerology begins (2 Chr 36:21). Here numerology is used only as an explanation of past and present, but it can also be used to explain the future, especially in the book of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel (Dn 9:2) refers to the literal 70 years of the exile as foretold by Jeremiah. In Daniel 9:24, this has been extended to 70 weeks of years (490 years) applied to the distant future. Daniel 9:25 sees 69 of these (483 years) as elapsing before Messiah appears. Presumably, the last week of the 70 is therefore thought of as the time of his activity. However this may be interpreted in terms of actual dates, it must be harmonized with 9:26, where the Messiah is “cut off” after 62 weeks of years (434 years). The difficulty lies in establishing the starting point for this long period. This is an example of an elaborate numerology, embracing centuries of history, all ultimately based on the 70 years of Jeremiah. According to biblical principles, this can have both an “immediate” fulfillment in the return from exile, and a “prophetic” fulfillment in the far distant future in connection with the coming of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The other major example of extended numerology in Daniel is in connection with the “time, times, and half a time” (7:25). This must stand for three and a half “times,” that is, half of seven “times.” Thus, it refers either to three and a half years (half a “week” of years) or three and a half “weeks” of years (cf. “seven times” in 4:16, where “seven years” is clearly meant). Whatever may be its ultimate prophetic fulfillment in Christ, the “initial” or “partial” fulfillment is the roughly three and a half years of bitter persecution of God’s people by Antiochus Epiphanes (167–164 <span>BC<\/span>). This figure of three and a half years reappears in Revelation 11:2 (“forty-two months”), and 12:14 (“a time, and times, and half a time”), to describe the period of Rome’s persecution of the Christian church. The figure had possibly become a symbol of any bitter but limited persecution. The “two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings” of Daniel 8:14 may mean 1,150 days, which is approximately the same length of time.<\/p>\n<p>The three and a half years of Daniel 7:25 reappear in Revelation 11 in the form of “forty-two months,” the time when the heathen will trample down Jerusalem (Rv 11:2). The 1,290 days of Daniel 12:11 reappear here (in the slightly different form of 1,260 days) as the time that God’s two witnesses will prophesy (Rv 11:3). The 42 months reappear in Revelation 13:5 as the period that the wild beast will be allowed to blaspheme. While the “thousand years” of 20:6 is not derived from Daniel at all, the metaphorical use of “thousand” is familiar to the OT. The closest direct parallel is in Deuteronomy 7:9, where God’s covenant will be kept with a “thousand generations” to come.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern.<\/p>\n<p>Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mystical, pre-Christian Jewish groups, and later carried to extremes by the Kabbalists.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>• Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>• Numerology<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionofNumbers\">Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew, and indeed any other Semitic language, has a simple but adequate system of numeration. The number one is an adjective. After that, the numerals are nouns, in parallel masculine and feminine forms, although the masculine is used with the feminine noun and vice versa. Ordinal numbers (first, second, third, etc.) exist alongside cardinal numbers (one, two, three), but as in most languages, the second set can be used instead of the first (“day two” instead of “second day”). From ten to nineteen, there is one composite form built like English “thirteen” (“three-ten”), but “twenty” is literally “tens” (the plural of “ten”). Thirty, forty, and so on are literally “threes,” “fours” (the plural of the words “three” and “four,” respectively) and so on, up to a hundred, which is a new word. There are also separate words for “thousand” and for “ten thousand,” as in Greek, Chinese, and many other languages. Larger numbers must be expressed by multiples of these (“ten thousand times ten thousand” and “thousands of thousands”), suggesting that large figures, rarely needed for small populations and tiny kingdoms, were expressed approximately. Hebrew has not only a singular and plural but also a dual form to express two of anything (two hundred, two thousand). Fractions (a half, a third, a tenth, etc.) could be expressed, and multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction were used. Indeed, instances of all four operations can be found in the Bible. The Hebrew mathematical system was basically part of the larger western Asian mathematical system, of which we know a great deal from Mesopotamia and Egypt. These countries, however, used a more highly developed mathematical system than Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WaysofWritingNumerals\">Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible, numbers are always written out in words, as on the famous Moabite Stone and the Siloam Inscription. But every nation in the ancient world could also express numbers by using figures or ciphers of various kinds (like our 1, 2, 3, . . .). Because of this danger of error, in later days numbers were normally written out in full, in words, where confusion, although still possible, was not nearly so likely. An additional way of writing numbers, known both to the Hebrews and the Greeks, was the use of consecutive letters of the alphabet instead of consecutive numerals (as if we used A for 1, B for 2, etc.). This system, in wide use by NT times, is the usual system in modern Hebrew and has the advantage that numerical combinations can be pronounced by inserting arbitrary vowels, thus making artificial words. For example, if the number of the beast (Rv 13:18), 666, is expressed in alphabetical letters, it can spell out the consonants of “Nero Caesar,” although other names are possible, especially if the variant reading 616 is used.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofLargeNumbers\">Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Even allowing for all these possibilities, there remain certain problems connected with large numbers, particularly in the OT. The most obvious is that of the ten long-lived patriarchs, whose ages are recorded in Genesis 5. Different figures (varying by whole centuries) are recorded for their ages in the Hebrew text, the Samaritan text, and the earliest Greek translation (known as the Septuagint), but all figures are very large. Some interpret these figures literally and point out that there is a steady reduction from the ages attained by these patriarchs to the more modest 120 years allotted to man in Noah’s time (Gn 6:3) and the 70 years accepted later as the human life span (Ps 90:10). This would correspond to the progressive spiritual deterioration of mankind after the fall, from the perfect state of Adam to the present condition. Whatever the explanation of the figures, there is no doubt that this is the theological intent of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The large number of Israelites who left Egypt is also problematic. If there were actually 600,000 fighting men (Nm 1:46), this would correspond to a whole nation of some 2 million or more. Possibly the word translated “thousand” means “clan units”; it would clearly be a much smaller total body, whatever its exact size. Of course, God could have maintained any number of people in the desert. The evidence of archaeology as to the population of Canaan both before and after the Israelite onslaught seems to support a lower number. The same principle might explain the large numbers given for the fighting men of the various Israelite tribes, and the huge totals for Israel and Judah’s military strength given at later times in the historical books of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>To the ordinary Bible reader, perhaps one of the biggest problems is the different numbers recorded in Chronicles and Kings, when the same incidents are being described. Manuscript errors, or confusion of numbers written by signs or single letters of the alphabet, may account for numerous individual inconsistencies, but not for wholesale differences, particularly as the figures in Chronicles are consistently much larger. These very large round numbers may have symbolic significance and may not be intended to be taken in their literal sense at all. Indeed, since the Jews had before them the book of Kings and the book of Chronicles at the same time, they can hardly have taken both sets of numbers literally themselves.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CountingbyGenerations\">Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>One of the problems of the OT is that of the dating of events. Even with an exact number system, there is no absolute fixed point from which to reckon. Later Jews and Christians counted from the presumed date of the Creation. Not until after the time of David and Solomon are both internal reference between the comparative dates of kings of Judah and Israel and external reference to monarchs outside Israel used. This open-endedness accounts for the vague period of “forty years” used so often in the OT (e.g., the book of Judges) for any long but indeterminate period of time, almost certainly corresponding to a generation (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dor<\/span>). Counting by generations is specific in some places in the Bible and may be implicit in others. For instance, Abraham’s descendants are to return to Canaan “in the fourth generation” (Gn 15:16), and the genealogy of Christ is neatly constructed on a pattern of three groups of fourteen generations (Mt 1:17), rather than on periods of years. Wherever people use and recite genealogies, such counting by generations is natural. But Abraham’s descendants are said to have returned to Canaan approximately four centuries later (Gal 3:17), and therefore the word “generation” sometimes stands for 100 years. The Hebrew word for “generation” may mean 120 years (Gn 6:3). Usually, the ancient Hebrews used vague phrases like “in those days” or “after those days” or “the days are coming,” which expressed past, present, and future without any specific mention of number. In other words, the Bible writers were more concerned with theology than with mathematics.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApproximateUseofNumbers\">Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, Israel’s 40 years in the desert is a good example of the approximate use of numbers (Nm 14:33). In the NT, Jesus was in the wilderness 40 days during the temptation (Mt 4:2), and there were 40 days between his resurrection and ascension (Acts 1:3). Moses was 40 years old at his call (Acts 7:23), apparently lived 40 years in Midian (Ex 7:7), and spent 40 years leading Israel out of Egypt and through the desert (Dt 34:7), for he is said to be 120 years old at his death. However, two generations of 40 years is the normal maximum for a healthy man (Ps 90:10), and even this is often shortened to 70 years by the rigors of life. Seventy is also used at times in this approximate sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolicUseofNumbers\">Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, seven symbolizes completeness or perfection. On the seventh day God rested from his labors and creation is finished (Gn 2:2). Pharaoh in his dream saw seven cattle coming from the Nile (41:2). Samson’s sacred Nazirite locks were braided in seven plaits (Jgs 16:13). Seven devils left Mary of Magdala, signifying the totality of her previous possession by Satan (Lk 8:2); “seven other devils” will enter the purified but vacant life of a person (Mt 12:45). However, on the positive side, there were the seven spirits of God (Rv 3:1). In the seventh year the Hebrew slave was to be freed (Ex 21:2), having completed his time of captivity and service. Every seventh year was a sabbatical year (Lv 25:4). Seven times seven reiterates the sense of completeness. In the Year of Jubilee (at the completion of 7 x 7 years = the 50th year), all land is freed and returns to the original owners (Lv 25:10). Pentecost, the Feast of Weeks, is seven times seven days after Passover. “Seventy,” which is literally “sevens” in Hebrew, strengthens the concept of perfection. There are 70 elders (Ex 24:1) in Israel. Israel was exiled to Babylon for 70 years (Jer 25:12) to complete its punishment. “Seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) reiterates this still further. The Lord was not giving Peter a mathematical number of times that he should forgive another person, but rather was insisting on limitless forgiveness for a brother’s sin.<\/p>\n<p>“Three” may well share in this meaning of completion or perfection, although not so forcibly (2 Kgs 13:18). Many things happen “on the third day” (Hos 6:2). Jonah spent three days in the stomach of the fish (Mt 12:40), and the Lord rose again on the third day (1 Cor 15:4). David was offered a choice of divine punishments—three years, three months, three days (2 Sm 24:13). For the Christian, “three” takes on a far deeper significance as the number of Persons of the Trinity. The three Persons are clearly expressed, for instance, in the Great Commission (Mt 28:19) and in the Pauline benediction (2 Cor 13:13). Many echoes of this threefold expression are in the NT, and many anticipations of it in the OT, of which the thrice-repeated “Holy” in Isaiah 6:3 is the most famous.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars see four as another symbol of completeness (four winds of heaven, Dn 7:2; four horsemen, Rv 6:1-7; four living creatures around the throne of God, Rv 4:6). Five is certainly used in an indefinite sense as a small number (Is 19:18; 30:17). Nor do eight or nine seem to have any special significance, although, like other numbers, they may be used in a factual sense to describe any of God’s activities (nine plagues on Egypt, Ex 7–10). “Ten” does have significance because of the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1-17), but not any special symbolism earlier in the Bible. If anything, “ten” is elsewhere used in a vague way. Laban changes Jacob’s wages ten times (Gn 31:7); Daniel and his friends are ten times better than all other students (Dn 1:20); ten times over, the Jewish settlers will be warned of impending enemy attacks (Neh 4:12).<\/p>\n<p>Eleven appears to have no special biblical significance, but 12 certainly has. The clearest proof of this is the existence of the 12 tribes in Israel. In Revelation 7:4-8, where it is mathematically important that the number of tribes be limited to 12, the tribe of Dan is altogether omitted—probably on account of Dan’s sin of idolatry (Jgs 18:14-20). Ishmael’s descendants were also divided into 12 clans (Gn 17:20), so that the number 12 was apparently significant outside Israel as well. In the NT Christ chose 12 apostles (Mt 10:1-4). The link with the number of tribes is made specific when Christ tells the apostles that they will sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes (Mt 19:28). However, it is interesting that, after the election and appointment of Matthias (Acts 1:26), the Christian church apparently made no subsequent efforts to maintain the number of apostles. Like “seven times seven,” “twelve times twelve” increases the force of the number. When this is further multiplied by a thousand, the figure becomes the 144,000 redeemed (Rv 7:4), who were sealed “out of all the tribes of Israel.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExactStatistics\">Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>As distinct from the metaphorical use of numbers to denote completion, immensity, and the like, numbers in Hebrew were often used to give exact tallies or measurements. Such usage is known to us only from clay tablets and ostraca (broken pieces of potsherd engraved in ink, used as rough notebooks). However, ascertaining exactly what the text was in its earliest form and what that text means is difficult.<\/p>\n<p>An example is the number of the sons of Jeconiah among the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh. They were struck down by the Lord because of their failure to rejoice with the others when God’s ark returned to Israel from the Philistine country (1 Sm 6:19). The Greek text (LXX) reads “seventy”; the later Hebrew manuscripts add “fifty thousand.” But, as Beth-shemesh itself was only a small frontier town, and the “sons of Jeconiah” was presumably only one clan among several, the smaller number is obviously the original, and the large addition due to some later manuscript confusion.<\/p>\n<p>A good rule in trying to decide whether a number is statistical or impressionistic is to determine whether it is a small number, or an unusual number for which there is no obvious theological explanation. When the men of Ai killed some 36 Israelites at the first assault on the city (Jos 7:5), the smallness of the number is evidence that this is a vividly remembered factual detail. Similarly, in the case of the number of Abraham’s 318 men (Gn 14:14) or the catch of 153 fish after the resurrection (Jn 21:11), the numbers, though large, are not round numbers but unusual combinations, and are obviously meant in a literal or statistical sense. Irrelevant details like this have a habit of remaining in the memory, and are the best guarantee of the trustworthiness of the narrative.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Numerology\">Numerology<\/p>\n<p>Numerology may be said to be an extended application of the metaphorical significance of numbers (7, 40, etc.) already discussed. In the Bible, this systematization of numbers always goes with a strong sense of the sovereignty of God, his control over human history, and a belief in his ongoing purpose and its triumphant conclusion.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the first clear instance of numerology in the Bible is 1 Kings 6:1, where Solomon began to build the temple 480 years after the exodus, a period 5 times 10 times 12, or 4 times 120, the ideal life span of man in early days (Gn 6:3). First Chronicles 6:3-8 gives 12 generations of men (presumably 40 years each) to cover the same period, so “twelve generations” is probably the real basis for the computation, rather than any exact year-by-year tally. A tally would have been impossible in the days of the judges and unlikely before the monarchy. David was the first to establish an official scribe or recorder to keep daily annals in Israel (2 Sm 8:16-17), as was common in the great kingdoms from far earlier times. Such Israelite annals are later mentioned as sources of the books of the kings (2 Kgs 14:18). The number 480 is probably a rough approximation rather than exact and denotes the end of one of God’s epochs.<\/p>\n<p>When Jeremiah prophesies an exile of 70 years for Judah (Jer 25:11; 29:10), it is not only a historical prediction that was literally fulfilled but also a symbol of completeness; Judah’s punishment is complete (cf. Is 40:2). Isaiah (Is 23:15) had made a similar prophecy of a 70-year punishment for Tyre, and Ezekiel (Ez 29:11-13) prophesied a 40-year “exile” for Egypt. When these 70 years are regarded as sabbatical years, where the land must lie untilled to compensate for the 7 times 70 years of sin before, then true numerology begins (2 Chr 36:21). Here numerology is used only as an explanation of past and present, but it can also be used to explain the future, especially in the book of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel (Dn 9:2) refers to the literal 70 years of the exile as foretold by Jeremiah. In Daniel 9:24, this has been extended to 70 weeks of years (490 years) applied to the distant future. Daniel 9:25 sees 69 of these (483 years) as elapsing before Messiah appears. Presumably, the last week of the 70 is therefore thought of as the time of his activity. However this may be interpreted in terms of actual dates, it must be harmonized with 9:26, where the Messiah is “cut off” after 62 weeks of years (434 years). The difficulty lies in establishing the starting point for this long period. This is an example of an elaborate numerology, embracing centuries of history, all ultimately based on the 70 years of Jeremiah. According to biblical principles, this can have both an “immediate” fulfillment in the return from exile, and a “prophetic” fulfillment in the far distant future in connection with the coming of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The other major example of extended numerology in Daniel is in connection with the “time, times, and half a time” (7:25). This must stand for three and a half “times,” that is, half of seven “times.” Thus, it refers either to three and a half years (half a “week” of years) or three and a half “weeks” of years (cf. “seven times” in 4:16, where “seven years” is clearly meant). Whatever may be its ultimate prophetic fulfillment in Christ, the “initial” or “partial” fulfillment is the roughly three and a half years of bitter persecution of God’s people by Antiochus Epiphanes (167–164 <span>BC<\/span>). This figure of three and a half years reappears in Revelation 11:2 (“forty-two months”), and 12:14 (“a time, and times, and half a time”), to describe the period of Rome’s persecution of the Christian church. The figure had possibly become a symbol of any bitter but limited persecution. The “two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings” of Daniel 8:14 may mean 1,150 days, which is approximately the same length of time.<\/p>\n<p>The three and a half years of Daniel 7:25 reappear in Revelation 11 in the form of “forty-two months,” the time when the heathen will trample down Jerusalem (Rv 11:2). The 1,290 days of Daniel 12:11 reappear here (in the slightly different form of 1,260 days) as the time that God’s two witnesses will prophesy (Rv 11:3). The 42 months reappear in Revelation 13:5 as the period that the wild beast will be allowed to blaspheme. While the “thousand years” of 20:6 is not derived from Daniel at all, the metaphorical use of “thousand” is familiar to the OT. The closest direct parallel is in Deuteronomy 7:9, where God’s covenant will be kept with a “thousand generations” to come.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY* Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern. Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mys...","summary_en":"NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY* Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern. Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mys...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33400,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sabbath","title_en":"Sabbath","content_ro":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","summary_en":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38589,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Word, Word of God, Words of God","title_en":"Word, Word of God, Words of God","content_ro":"<h3>WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheImportanceofWords\">The Importance of Words<\/p>\n<p>In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, agreements, and records had little usefulness. Personal integrity and sincere speech were essential to communication and, for most people, to self-expression and stable relationships. The words of poets, prophets, storytellers, and instructors were carefully preserved.<\/p>\n<p>Words were diligently tested. Foolish words, flattery, deceit, words of enticement, lies, rumor, scandal, and blasphemous speech were all recognized as evil. The oath had to be inviolable in commercial, judicial, and civic affairs. The spoken blessing had power within itself and could not be withdrawn (Gn 27:30-38; Mt 10:12-13); so also the vow (Jgs 11:34-35) and the curse (Gn 27:12-13). Equally powerful was the word of command—of priestly, judicial, or royal authority (Eccl 8:4).<\/p>\n<p>This estimate of human words lingers in the NT. The word reveals the inner self, and so every careless, hurtful, deceitful word will be judged (Mt 12:34-37; 5:22), as will blasphemy (Lk 12:10). Paul (Eph 4:29; 5:4) and James (Jas 3:1-12) preserve this Hebrew reverence for the spoken word.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordsofGod\">The Words of God<\/p>\n<p>God’s spoken word has been preserved in Scripture. His word came to and through the prophets (1 Kgs 12:22; 1 Chr 17:3; cf. Lk 3:2), who spoke and acted “by the word of the Lord.” His word also came in the law, which God “spoke” on Sinai (Ex 20:1); hence, “statutes,” “commandments,” and “precepts” are synonyms for God’s “word” (e.g., Ps 119).<\/p>\n<p>Periods when no such divine communication came constituted “famine” (1 Sm 3:1; Am 8:11). Mingled with warnings and injunctions were divine promises. All God’s words were dependable (Is 31:2), firmly fixed in heaven (Ps 119:89; Is 40:8), and backed up by divine oath (Jer 1:12; Ps 110:4; Ez 12:25, 28). A word, expressing the divine mind, was not threatening or burdensome; it was a delight, hope, joy, and protection against sin (Pss 1; 119; Jer 15:16). Men can live by it (Dt 8:3; Mt 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>God’s word has power to execute his will. It will not return to him “empty” but accomplish that which he purposes (Is 55:11). By his speech alone, God created the world, and his word upholds it (Gn 1; Ps 33:6; cf. Heb 1:2; 11:3; 2 Pt 3:5). Eventually, this divine revelation was put into writing, which makes the Bible also “the word of God” (Mk 7:13; cf. Lk 16:29-31; Jn 5:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus spoke the word of God. He was “mighty in word” (Lk 24:19); he taught with authority (Mk 1:22, 27), exercising power over the sea, disease, demons, and death (Mt 8:8, 13). His “word of the kingdom” is the living seed, which, planted in the good soil of receptive hearts, bears fruit for God (Mt 13:19; Mk 4:14). The word that Christ gives to his disciples cleanses them and frees them (Jn 8:31; 12:48; 15:3; 17:14). The word of faith the church preaches (Rom 10:8-9, 17) is variously described as the word of salvation, the word of grace, the word of reconciliation, the word of the gospel, the word of righteousness, and the word of life.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordofGod\">The Word of God<\/p>\n<p>Deliberately recalling Genesis 1, the Gospel writer, John, named the Son of God “the Word.” As the Word, the Son of God fully conveys and communicates God. The Greek term is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>;<\/em> it was used in two ways by the Greeks. The word might be thought of as remaining within a person, when it denoted his thought or reason. Or it might refer to the word going forth from a person, when it denoted the expression of his thought, i.e., speech. As a philosophical term, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> denoted the principle of the universe, even the creative energy that generated the universe. In both the Jewish conception and the Greek, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was associated with the idea of beginnings—the world began through the origination and instrumentality of the Word (Gn 1:3ff., where the expression “God said” is used again and again). John may have had these ideas in mind, but most likely he originated a new term to identify the Son of God as the divine expression in human form (Jn 1:14). He is the image of the invisible God (Col 1:15), the express image of God’s substance (Heb 1:3). In the Godhead, the Son functions as the revealer of God and the reality of God, which is a central theme throughout John’s Gospel. John used a similar title in his first epistle: “the Word of life” (1 Jn 1:1-3). And in Revelation 19:11-16, Jesus is presented as the King of kings and Lord of lords, who has a name on him: “the Word of God.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible; John, Gospel of; Logos; Revelation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheImportanceofWords\">The Importance of Words<\/p>\n<p>In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, agreements, and records had little usefulness. Personal integrity and sincere speech were essential to communication and, for most people, to self-expression and stable relationships. The words of poets, prophets, storytellers, and instructors were carefully preserved.<\/p>\n<p>Words were diligently tested. Foolish words, flattery, deceit, words of enticement, lies, rumor, scandal, and blasphemous speech were all recognized as evil. The oath had to be inviolable in commercial, judicial, and civic affairs. The spoken blessing had power within itself and could not be withdrawn (Gn 27:30-38; Mt 10:12-13); so also the vow (Jgs 11:34-35) and the curse (Gn 27:12-13). Equally powerful was the word of command—of priestly, judicial, or royal authority (Eccl 8:4).<\/p>\n<p>This estimate of human words lingers in the NT. The word reveals the inner self, and so every careless, hurtful, deceitful word will be judged (Mt 12:34-37; 5:22), as will blasphemy (Lk 12:10). Paul (Eph 4:29; 5:4) and James (Jas 3:1-12) preserve this Hebrew reverence for the spoken word.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordsofGod\">The Words of God<\/p>\n<p>God’s spoken word has been preserved in Scripture. His word came to and through the prophets (1 Kgs 12:22; 1 Chr 17:3; cf. Lk 3:2), who spoke and acted “by the word of the Lord.” His word also came in the law, which God “spoke” on Sinai (Ex 20:1); hence, “statutes,” “commandments,” and “precepts” are synonyms for God’s “word” (e.g., Ps 119).<\/p>\n<p>Periods when no such divine communication came constituted “famine” (1 Sm 3:1; Am 8:11). Mingled with warnings and injunctions were divine promises. All God’s words were dependable (Is 31:2), firmly fixed in heaven (Ps 119:89; Is 40:8), and backed up by divine oath (Jer 1:12; Ps 110:4; Ez 12:25, 28). A word, expressing the divine mind, was not threatening or burdensome; it was a delight, hope, joy, and protection against sin (Pss 1; 119; Jer 15:16). Men can live by it (Dt 8:3; Mt 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>God’s word has power to execute his will. It will not return to him “empty” but accomplish that which he purposes (Is 55:11). By his speech alone, God created the world, and his word upholds it (Gn 1; Ps 33:6; cf. Heb 1:2; 11:3; 2 Pt 3:5). Eventually, this divine revelation was put into writing, which makes the Bible also “the word of God” (Mk 7:13; cf. Lk 16:29-31; Jn 5:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus spoke the word of God. He was “mighty in word” (Lk 24:19); he taught with authority (Mk 1:22, 27), exercising power over the sea, disease, demons, and death (Mt 8:8, 13). His “word of the kingdom” is the living seed, which, planted in the good soil of receptive hearts, bears fruit for God (Mt 13:19; Mk 4:14). The word that Christ gives to his disciples cleanses them and frees them (Jn 8:31; 12:48; 15:3; 17:14). The word of faith the church preaches (Rom 10:8-9, 17) is variously described as the word of salvation, the word of grace, the word of reconciliation, the word of the gospel, the word of righteousness, and the word of life.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordofGod\">The Word of God<\/p>\n<p>Deliberately recalling Genesis 1, the Gospel writer, John, named the Son of God “the Word.” As the Word, the Son of God fully conveys and communicates God. The Greek term is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>;<\/em> it was used in two ways by the Greeks. The word might be thought of as remaining within a person, when it denoted his thought or reason. Or it might refer to the word going forth from a person, when it denoted the expression of his thought, i.e., speech. As a philosophical term, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> denoted the principle of the universe, even the creative energy that generated the universe. In both the Jewish conception and the Greek, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was associated with the idea of beginnings—the world began through the origination and instrumentality of the Word (Gn 1:3ff., where the expression “God said” is used again and again). John may have had these ideas in mind, but most likely he originated a new term to identify the Son of God as the divine expression in human form (Jn 1:14). He is the image of the invisible God (Col 1:15), the express image of God’s substance (Heb 1:3). In the Godhead, the Son functions as the revealer of God and the reality of God, which is a central theme throughout John’s Gospel. John used a similar title in his first epistle: “the Word of life” (1 Jn 1:1-3). And in Revelation 19:11-16, Jesus is presented as the King of kings and Lord of lords, who has a name on him: “the Word of God.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible; John, Gospel of; Logos; Revelation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son. The Importance of Words In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, ag...","summary_en":"WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son. The Importance of Words In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, ag...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43833,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1–23:33<\/strong> The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or <em>suzerain-vassal<\/em> treaties, that great kings (the <em>suzerains<\/em>) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the <em>vassals<\/em>) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s offer of protection from enemies and care during emergency, while the people would agree to behave in conformity to the preferences of that king. Exodus includes a brief setting forth of the terms of the covenant (20:3-17) followed by expanded terms (chs 21–23). (4) Another statement indicated where a written copy of the covenant should be kept and when it should be read (24:7; 25:16). (5) The gods were called upon to witness the agreement (in Exodus, historical markers are substituted for the gods, 24:4). (6) The blessings and curses were stated that would follow upon obedience or disobedience to the covenant (23:20-33). Utilizing the political form of the covenant, God invited his people into a formal relationship with himself as king while avoiding the pagan overtones that contaminated religious forms of the time. Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:1–7:29) is a New Testament parallel to this section of Exodus, with the Beatitudes (Matt 5:3-12) paralleling the Ten Commandments.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1–23:33<\/strong> The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or <em>suzerain-vassal<\/em> treaties, that great kings (the <em>suzerains<\/em>) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the <em>vassals<\/em>) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s offer of protection from enemies and care during emergency, while the people would agree to behave in conformity to the preferences of that king. Exodus includes a brief setting forth of the terms of the covenant (20:3-17) followed by expanded terms (chs 21–23). (4) Another statement indicated where a written copy of the covenant should be kept and when it should be read (24:7; 25:16). (5) The gods were called upon to witness the agreement (in Exodus, historical markers are substituted for the gods, 24:4). (6) The blessings and curses were stated that would follow upon obedience or disobedience to the covenant (23:20-33). Utilizing the political form of the covenant, God invited his people into a formal relationship with himself as king while avoiding the pagan overtones that contaminated religious forms of the time. Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:1–7:29) is a New Testament parallel to this section of Exodus, with the Beatitudes (Matt 5:3-12) paralleling the Ten Commandments.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1–23:33 The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or suzerain-vassal treaties, that great kings (the suzerains) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the vassals) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s of...","summary_en":"20:1–23:33 The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or suzerain-vassal treaties, that great kings (the suzerains) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the vassals) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s of...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43834,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1-17<\/strong> The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1-17<\/strong> The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1-17 The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).","summary_en":"20:1-17 The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43835,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1<\/strong> This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • <em>all these instructions<\/em> (literally <em>all these words<\/em>): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1<\/strong> This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • <em>all these instructions<\/em> (literally <em>all these words<\/em>): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1 This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • all these instructions (literally all these words): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.","summary_en":"20:1 This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • all these instructions (literally all these words): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71459,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1–23:33<\/strong> The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or <em>suzerain-vassal<\/em> treaties, that great kings (the <em>suzerains<\/em>) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the <em>vassals<\/em>) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s offer of protection from enemies and care during emergency, while the people would agree to behave in conformity to the preferences of that king. Exodus includes a brief setting forth of the terms of the covenant (20:3-17) followed by expanded terms (chs 21–23). (4) Another statement indicated where a written copy of the covenant should be kept and when it should be read (24:7; 25:16). (5) The gods were called upon to witness the agreement (in Exodus, historical markers are substituted for the gods, 24:4). (6) The blessings and curses were stated that would follow upon obedience or disobedience to the covenant (23:20-33). Utilizing the political form of the covenant, God invited his people into a formal relationship with himself as king while avoiding the pagan overtones that contaminated religious forms of the time. Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:1–7:29) is a New Testament parallel to this section of Exodus, with the Beatitudes (Matt 5:3-12) paralleling the Ten Commandments.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1–23:33<\/strong> The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or <em>suzerain-vassal<\/em> treaties, that great kings (the <em>suzerains<\/em>) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the <em>vassals<\/em>) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s offer of protection from enemies and care during emergency, while the people would agree to behave in conformity to the preferences of that king. Exodus includes a brief setting forth of the terms of the covenant (20:3-17) followed by expanded terms (chs 21–23). (4) Another statement indicated where a written copy of the covenant should be kept and when it should be read (24:7; 25:16). (5) The gods were called upon to witness the agreement (in Exodus, historical markers are substituted for the gods, 24:4). (6) The blessings and curses were stated that would follow upon obedience or disobedience to the covenant (23:20-33). Utilizing the political form of the covenant, God invited his people into a formal relationship with himself as king while avoiding the pagan overtones that contaminated religious forms of the time. Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:1–7:29) is a New Testament parallel to this section of Exodus, with the Beatitudes (Matt 5:3-12) paralleling the Ten Commandments.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1–23:33 The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or suzerain-vassal treaties, that great kings (the suzerains) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the vassals) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s of...","summary_en":"20:1–23:33 The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or suzerain-vassal treaties, that great kings (the suzerains) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the vassals) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s of...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71460,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1-17<\/strong> The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1-17<\/strong> The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1-17 The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).","summary_en":"20:1-17 The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71461,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1<\/strong> This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • <em>all these instructions<\/em> (literally <em>all these words<\/em>): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1<\/strong> This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • <em>all these instructions<\/em> (literally <em>all these words<\/em>): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1 This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • all these instructions (literally all these words): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.","summary_en":"20:1 This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • all these instructions (literally all these words): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99085,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1–23:33<\/strong> The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or <em>suzerain-vassal<\/em> treaties, that great kings (the <em>suzerains<\/em>) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the <em>vassals<\/em>) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s offer of protection from enemies and care during emergency, while the people would agree to behave in conformity to the preferences of that king. Exodus includes a brief setting forth of the terms of the covenant (20:3-17) followed by expanded terms (chs 21–23). (4) Another statement indicated where a written copy of the covenant should be kept and when it should be read (24:7; 25:16). (5) The gods were called upon to witness the agreement (in Exodus, historical markers are substituted for the gods, 24:4). (6) The blessings and curses were stated that would follow upon obedience or disobedience to the covenant (23:20-33). Utilizing the political form of the covenant, God invited his people into a formal relationship with himself as king while avoiding the pagan overtones that contaminated religious forms of the time. Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:1–7:29) is a New Testament parallel to this section of Exodus, with the Beatitudes (Matt 5:3-12) paralleling the Ten Commandments.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1–23:33<\/strong> The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or <em>suzerain-vassal<\/em> treaties, that great kings (the <em>suzerains<\/em>) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the <em>vassals<\/em>) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s offer of protection from enemies and care during emergency, while the people would agree to behave in conformity to the preferences of that king. Exodus includes a brief setting forth of the terms of the covenant (20:3-17) followed by expanded terms (chs 21–23). (4) Another statement indicated where a written copy of the covenant should be kept and when it should be read (24:7; 25:16). (5) The gods were called upon to witness the agreement (in Exodus, historical markers are substituted for the gods, 24:4). (6) The blessings and curses were stated that would follow upon obedience or disobedience to the covenant (23:20-33). Utilizing the political form of the covenant, God invited his people into a formal relationship with himself as king while avoiding the pagan overtones that contaminated religious forms of the time. Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:1–7:29) is a New Testament parallel to this section of Exodus, with the Beatitudes (Matt 5:3-12) paralleling the Ten Commandments.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1–23:33 The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or suzerain-vassal treaties, that great kings (the suzerains) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the vassals) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s of...","summary_en":"20:1–23:33 The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or suzerain-vassal treaties, that great kings (the suzerains) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the vassals) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s of...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99086,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1-17<\/strong> The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1-17<\/strong> The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1-17 The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).","summary_en":"20:1-17 The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99087,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1<\/strong> This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • <em>all these instructions<\/em> (literally <em>all these words<\/em>): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1<\/strong> This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • <em>all these instructions<\/em> (literally <em>all these words<\/em>): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1 This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • all these instructions (literally all these words): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.","summary_en":"20:1 This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • all these instructions (literally all these words): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126711,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1–23:33<\/strong> The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or <em>suzerain-vassal<\/em> treaties, that great kings (the <em>suzerains<\/em>) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the <em>vassals<\/em>) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s offer of protection from enemies and care during emergency, while the people would agree to behave in conformity to the preferences of that king. Exodus includes a brief setting forth of the terms of the covenant (20:3-17) followed by expanded terms (chs 21–23). (4) Another statement indicated where a written copy of the covenant should be kept and when it should be read (24:7; 25:16). (5) The gods were called upon to witness the agreement (in Exodus, historical markers are substituted for the gods, 24:4). (6) The blessings and curses were stated that would follow upon obedience or disobedience to the covenant (23:20-33). Utilizing the political form of the covenant, God invited his people into a formal relationship with himself as king while avoiding the pagan overtones that contaminated religious forms of the time. Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:1–7:29) is a New Testament parallel to this section of Exodus, with the Beatitudes (Matt 5:3-12) paralleling the Ten Commandments.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1–23:33<\/strong> The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or <em>suzerain-vassal<\/em> treaties, that great kings (the <em>suzerains<\/em>) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the <em>vassals<\/em>) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s offer of protection from enemies and care during emergency, while the people would agree to behave in conformity to the preferences of that king. Exodus includes a brief setting forth of the terms of the covenant (20:3-17) followed by expanded terms (chs 21–23). (4) Another statement indicated where a written copy of the covenant should be kept and when it should be read (24:7; 25:16). (5) The gods were called upon to witness the agreement (in Exodus, historical markers are substituted for the gods, 24:4). (6) The blessings and curses were stated that would follow upon obedience or disobedience to the covenant (23:20-33). Utilizing the political form of the covenant, God invited his people into a formal relationship with himself as king while avoiding the pagan overtones that contaminated religious forms of the time. Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:1–7:29) is a New Testament parallel to this section of Exodus, with the Beatitudes (Matt 5:3-12) paralleling the Ten Commandments.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1–23:33 The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or suzerain-vassal treaties, that great kings (the suzerains) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the vassals) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s of...","summary_en":"20:1–23:33 The Sinai covenant follows very closely the form of the covenants, or suzerain-vassal treaties, that great kings (the suzerains) in the ancient Near East offered to subject peoples (the vassals) as follows: (1) An introduction named the great king who was offering the covenant (20:1). (2) A historical preamble set out the circumstances that had led to the offer of a treaty (20:2). (3) Stipulations, the terms upon which the two parties were to agree, typically included the king’s of...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126712,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1-17<\/strong> The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1-17<\/strong> The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1-17 The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).","summary_en":"20:1-17 The brief statement of the terms of the covenant (see also Deut 5:6-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126713,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1<\/strong> This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • <em>all these instructions<\/em> (literally <em>all these words<\/em>): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1<\/strong> This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • <em>all these instructions<\/em> (literally <em>all these words<\/em>): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1 This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • all these instructions (literally all these words): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.","summary_en":"20:1 This corresponds to the introductory statement in the ancient covenant format. • all these instructions (literally all these words): When these statements are referred to elsewhere (34:28; Deut 4:13; 10:4), the Hebrew text refers to them as the “Ten Words.” These are not arbitrary commandments, but an explanation of God’s basic instructions for human living given by the Creator of human life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60250,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Ancient Law Codes","title_en":"Ancient Law Codes","content_ro":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\n<p>Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s <span>BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\n<p>What does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\n<p>While many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\n<p>Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s <span>BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\n<p>What does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\n<p>While many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","summary_en":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61518,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pure Worship","title_en":"Pure Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","summary_en":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64100,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Broken Covenant","title_en":"The Broken Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>For centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\n<p>At the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\n<p>Just as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>For centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\n<p>At the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\n<p>Just as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","summary_en":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64725,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"What Is Good","title_en":"What Is Good","content_ro":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","summary_en":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87876,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Ancient Law Codes","title_en":"Ancient Law Codes","content_ro":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\n<p>Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s <span>BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\n<p>What does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\n<p>While many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\n<p>Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s <span>BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\n<p>What does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\n<p>While many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","summary_en":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89144,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pure Worship","title_en":"Pure Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","summary_en":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91726,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Broken Covenant","title_en":"The Broken Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>For centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\n<p>At the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\n<p>Just as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>For centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\n<p>At the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\n<p>Just as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","summary_en":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92351,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"What Is Good","title_en":"What Is Good","content_ro":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","summary_en":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115502,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Ancient Law Codes","title_en":"Ancient Law Codes","content_ro":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\n<p>Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s <span>BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\n<p>What does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\n<p>While many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\n<p>Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s <span>BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\n<p>What does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\n<p>While many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","summary_en":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116770,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pure Worship","title_en":"Pure Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","summary_en":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119352,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Broken Covenant","title_en":"The Broken Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>For centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\n<p>At the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\n<p>Just as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>For centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\n<p>At the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\n<p>Just as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","summary_en":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119977,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"What Is Good","title_en":"What Is Good","content_ro":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","summary_en":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143128,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Ancient Law Codes","title_en":"Ancient Law Codes","content_ro":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\n<p>Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s <span>BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\n<p>What does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\n<p>While many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Ancient Law Codes<\/h3>\n<p>Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s <span>BC<\/span>, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken from Hammurabi, subsequent discoveries produced law codes preceding Hammurabi’s by at least 500 years, and several laws are common to all of them, so Hammurabi also did not originate them.<\/p>\n<p>What does this mean for the Bible? First, it is not surprising that we find similar laws from cultures neighboring Israel; similar societies require similar codes of conduct in order to ensure justice. Second, the biblical laws are unique in that they are incorporated in a covenant with God. Elsewhere in the ancient Near East, religious laws (about sacrifice, prayers, offerings, etc.) and civil laws (covering theft, lying, sexual conduct, murder, etc.) were completely unrelated because ethics and religion were considered separate domains. Religion was a matter of prayer, devotion, offerings, and ritual behavior—the territory of priests. Ethics concerned social and civil behavior—the business of the king. The biblical view of things is different: God is sovereign over both religion and society. So a person who is in a relationship with the true God must not only participate in proper worship (religion) but also treat other people rightly (ethics).<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s covenant with God made use of existing forms but invested them with new meaning. For example, the basic layout of Israel’s Tabernacle (Exod 26–27) and Temple (see 1 Kgs 6:1–7:51) were the same as elsewhere in the ancient world, and the basic forms of the Hebrew sacrifices (see Lev 1–7) were largely identical to the forms of pagan sacrifices. But the meaning and purpose of the Temple and the sacrifices were significantly different from the meaning and purpose of such things in paganism (see study notes on Exod 20:3-17; 25:1–40:38; Lev 1:1–7:38).<\/p>\n<p>While many of the laws of Moses were not new to the world at that time, the idea that the behavior they called for is written into the very fabric of the universe by its Creator was radically new.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:1–23:33; 34:1–35:3; Lev 1:1–27:34; Deut 4:1–33:29; Ezra 1:1-4; Esth 1:13-19; 8:9-14; Dan 6:6-9; Luke 2:1-3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","summary_en":"Ancient Law Codes Until the late 1800s, the law of Moses was believed to be a unique code of law, existing nearly a thousand years before anything comparable in Greek and Roman laws. Excavations in Persia in the late 1800s, however, uncovered laws set forth by the Babylonian king Hammurabi in the 1700s BC, some 300 years prior to Moses. Surprisingly, a number of the laws in that list are almost identical to those in the Bible. Though this seemed to imply that the biblical laws had been taken ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144396,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pure Worship","title_en":"Pure Worship","content_ro":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pure Worship<\/h3>\n<p>From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship.<\/p>\n<p>When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper manner and dedicating the Temple to the Lord (8:1-11; see Deut 16:13-17). In all of this, Solomon kept the requirements laid down in the law (see, e.g., Exod 25:10-22), which were intended to keep Israel’s worship purely focused on the Lord and his word.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, people tend to worship according to their own inclinations rather than according to God’s instructions, and Israel was no different. In his later years, Solomon turned away from the Lord to other gods (1 Kgs 11:4-8). After Solomon’s death, Jeroboam established a competing, idolatrous religion in the northern kingdom, in clear violation of God’s law (14:9-10, 15-16). False worship characterized the northern kingdom throughout its history (e.g., 15:26; 16:13, 25-26, 30-33; 21:25-26). Meanwhile, in Judah, the southern kingdom, tolerance for local pagan altars became a persistent spiritual distraction (15:14; 22:43). Neither Judah nor Israel remained pure in their worship of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>There is one God, and God’s people must worship only him (1 Kgs 8:23; see Deut 5:7, 9; 6:4; John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Our worship must come from a pure heart; we must remain completely faithful to the Lord in dedicated service to him (1 Kgs 15:14; 17:1; see Deut 10:12, 20; Ps 24:3-4; Matt 4:10; John 4:24). Our daily and weekly worship of God should have a sense of God’s presence, which will be a source of genuine joy (1 Kgs 8:56; cp. Ps 63:1-3; Phil 4:4). Just as Israel’s Temple was a sanctuary intended to attract all people (1 Kgs 8:41-43), believers, who are the temple of the living God (1 Cor 3:16-17), are to live so as to attract and motivate others to desire to know the Lord and worship him (Matt 5:16; Acts 2:40-47; 2 Tim 4:5; 1 Pet 2:12). Our whole lives should include daily worship of Christ, acknowledging him as Lord (1 Pet 3:15). And we must not let any idol take God’s place in our hearts (1 Jn 5:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20; Exod 4:31; 25:10-22; Lev 1:1–8:36; Deut 5:7-9; 6:4-9; 10:12, 20; 16:13-17; 26:1-15; 1 Kgs 5:3-5; Pss 24:3-6; 51:1-19; Hos 6:6; 14:1-2; Mic 6:6-8; Matt 4:10; 5:16; 6:1-18; John 4:19-24; 5:23; 14:6; Acts 2:40-47; Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 14:1-40; Phil 3:3; Heb 10:1-25; 1 Pet 3:15; 1 Jn 5:21; Rev 5:9-13; 15:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","summary_en":"Pure Worship From the beginning of God’s relationship with Israel, he made provision for their worship of him to be pleasing to him (Exod 20–40; Lev 1–8). One of the Lord’s key purposes for his people is that they offer him pure worship. When Solomon built the Temple as a permanent worship sanctuary, he took great care to erect “a Temple to honor the name of the Lord” (1 Kgs 5:3-5). He built in accordance with the pattern he was given, placing the Ark in the inner sanctuary in the proper mann...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146978,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Broken Covenant","title_en":"The Broken Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>For centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\n<p>At the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\n<p>Just as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\n<p>A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>For centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\n<p>At the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\n<p>Just as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","summary_en":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147603,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"What Is Good","title_en":"What Is Good","content_ro":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","summary_en":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":4707,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Text of the (Old Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","title_en":"and Text of the (Old Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (Old Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the OT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. The ancient manuscripts of the OT are the basic working material used to seek out the original text of the Bible with as great a degree of accuracy as possible. This process is called textual criticism, sometimes designated “lower criticism” to distinguish it from “higher criticism,” which is analysis of the date, unity, and authorship of the biblical writings.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Old Testament Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Significant Old Testament Versions<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantOldTestamentManuscripts\">Important Old Testament Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Most medieval manuscripts of the OT exhibit a fairly standardized form of the Hebrew text. This standardization reflects the work of the medieval scribes known as Masoretes (<span>AD<\/span> 500–900); the text that resulted from their work is called the Masoretic Text. Most of the important manuscripts dated from the 11th century <span>AD<\/span> or later all reflect this same basic textual tradition. But since the Masoretic Text did not stabilize until well after <span>AD<\/span> 500, many questions about its development in the preceding centuries could not be answered. So the primary task for OT textual critics has been to compare earlier witnesses in order to discover how the Masoretic Text came to be, and how it and earlier witnesses of the Hebrew Bible are related. This leads us to the initial task of textual criticism: the collection of all possible records of the biblical writings.<\/p>\n<p>All the primary sources of the Hebrew Scriptures are handwritten manuscripts, usually written on animal skins, papyrus, or sometimes metal. The fact that they are handwritten is the source of many difficulties for the textual critic. Human error and editorial tampering are often to blame for the many variant readings in OT and NT manuscripts. The fact that the ancient manuscripts are written on skins or papyrus is another source of difficulty. Due to natural decay, most of the surviving ancient manuscripts are fragmentary and difficult to read.<\/p>\n<p>There are many secondary witnesses to the ancient OT text, including translations into other languages, quotations used by both friends and enemies of biblical religion, and evidence from early printed texts. Most of the secondary witnesses have suffered in ways similar to the primary ones. They, too, contain numerous variants due to both intentional and accidental scribal errors and are fragmentary as a result of natural decay. Since variant readings do exist in the surviving ancient manuscripts, these must be collected and compared. The task of comparing and listing the variant readings is known as collation.<\/p>\n<h5>Manuscripts with the Masoretic Text<\/h5>\n<p>The textual history of the Masoretic Text is a significant story in its own right. This text of the Hebrew Bible is the most complete in existence. It forms the basis for our modern Hebrew Bibles and is the prototype against which all comparisons are made in OT textual studies. It is called Masoretic because in its present form it is based on the <em>Masora,<\/em> the textual tradition of the Jewish scholars known as the Masoretes of Tiberias. (Tiberias was the location of their community on the Sea of Galilee.) The Masoretes, whose school flourished between <span>AD<\/span> 500 and 1000, standardized the traditional consonantal text by adding vowel pointing and marginal notes. (The ancient Hebrew alphabet had no vowels.)<\/p>\n<p>The Masoretic Text, as it exists today, owes much to the Ben Asher family. For five or six generations, from the second half of the eighth century to the middle of the tenth century <span>AD<\/span>, this family played a leading role in the Masoretic work at Tiberias. A faithful record of their work can be found in the oldest existing Masoretic manuscripts, which go back to the final two members of that family. The oldest dated Masoretic manuscript is Codex Cairensis (<span>AD<\/span> 895), which is attributed to Moses ben Asher. This manuscript contained both the Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) and the Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 12 Minor Prophets). The rest of the OT is missing from this manuscript.<\/p>\n<p>The other major surviving manuscript attributed to the Ben Asher family is the Aleppo Codex. According to the manuscript’s concluding note, Aaron ben Moses ben Asher was responsible for writing the Masoretic notes and pointing the text. This manuscript contained the entire OT and dates from the first half of the 10th century <span>AD<\/span>. It was reportedly destroyed in anti-Jewish riots in 1947, but this proved to be only partly true. A majority of the manuscript survived and will be used as the base for a new critical edition of the Hebrew Bible to be published by the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript known as Codex Leningradensis, presently stored in the Leningrad Public Library, is of special importance as a witness to the Ben Asher text. According to a note on the manuscript, it was copied in <span>AD<\/span> 1008 from texts written by Aaron ben Moses ben Asher. Since the oldest complete Hebrew text of the OT (the Aleppo Codex) was not available to scholars earlier in this century, Codex Leningradensis was used as the textual base for the popular Hebrew texts of today: <em>Biblia Hebraica,<\/em> edited by R. Kittel, and its revision, <em>Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia,<\/em> edited by K. Elliger and W. Rudolf.<\/p>\n<p>There are quite a number of less important manuscript codices that reflect the Masoretic tradition: the Petersburg Codex of the Prophets and the Erfurt Codices. There are also a number of manuscripts that no longer exist but which were used by scholars in the Masoretic period. One of the most prominent is Codex Hillel, traditionally attributed to Rabbi Hillel ben Moses ben Hillel about <span>AD<\/span> 600. This codex was said to be very accurate and was used for the revision of other manuscripts. Readings of this codex are cited repeatedly by the early medieval Masoretes. Codex Muga, Codex Jericho, and Codex Jerushalmi, also no longer extant, were also cited by the Masoretes. These manuscripts were likely prominent examples of unpointed texts that had become part of a standardizing consensus in the first centuries <span>AD<\/span>. These laid the groundwork for the work of the Masoretes of Tiberias.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the completeness of the Masoretic manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible, a major problem still remains for OT textual critics. The Masoretic manuscripts, as old as they are, were written between 1,000 and 2,000 years after the original autographs. Earlier witnesses to the ancient Hebrew text were needed to testify to the accuracy of the Masoretic Text.<\/p>\n<h5>The Dead Sea Scrolls<\/h5>\n<p>The most important ancient witnesses to the Hebrew Bible are the texts discovered at Wadi Qumran in the 1940s and 1950s. (<em>Wadi<\/em> is an Arabic word for a riverbed that is dry except in the rainy season.) Before the Qumran discoveries, the oldest existing Hebrew manuscripts of the OT dated from about <span>AD<\/span> 900. The greatest importance of the Dead Sea Scrolls, therefore, lies in the discovery of biblical manuscripts dating back to only about 300 years after the close of the OT canon. That makes them 1,000 years earlier than the oldest manuscripts previously known to biblical scholars. The texts found at Wadi Qumran were all completed before the Roman conquest of Palestine in <span>AD<\/span> 70, and many predate this event by quite some time. Among the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Isaiah Scroll has received the most publicity, although the collection contains fragments of all the books in the Hebrew Bible with the exception of Esther.<\/p>\n<p>Because the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls is so important for OT textual criticism, a short history and description of these recent discoveries is appropriate. The manuscripts now known as the Dead Sea Scrolls are a collection of biblical and extrabiblical manuscripts from Qumran, an ancient Jewish religious community near the Dead Sea.<\/p>\n<p>Before the Qumran find, few manuscripts had been discovered in the Holy Land. The early church father Origen (third century <span>AD<\/span>) mentioned using Hebrew and Greek manuscripts that had been stored in jars in caves near Jericho. In the ninth century <span>AD<\/span> a patriarch of the eastern church, Timothy I, wrote a letter to Sergius, metropolitan (archbishop) of Elam, in which he, too, referred to a large number of Hebrew manuscripts found in a cave near Jericho. For more than 1,000 years since then, however, no other significant manuscript discoveries were forthcoming from caves in that region near the Dead Sea.<\/p>\n<h5>Scroll Discoveries at Wadi Qumran<\/h5>\n<p>The history of the Dead Sea manuscripts, both of their hiding and of their finding, reads like a mystery adventure story. It began with a telephone call on Wednesday afternoon, February 18, 1948, in the troubled city of Jerusalem. Butrus Sowmy, librarian and monk of St Mark’s Monastery in the Armenian quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem, was calling John C. Trever, acting director of the American Schools of Oriental Research (ASOR). Sowmy had been preparing a catalog of the monastery’s collection of rare books. Among them he found some scrolls in ancient Hebrew that, he said, had been in the monastery for about 40 years. Could ASOR supply him with some information for the catalog?<\/p>\n<p>The following day Sowmy and his brother brought a suitcase containing five scrolls or parts of scrolls wrapped in an Arabic newspaper. Pulling back the end of one of the scrolls Trever discovered that it was written in a clear, square Hebrew script. He copied several lines from that scroll, carefully examined three others, but was unable to unroll the fifth because it was too brittle. After the Syrians left, Trever told the story of the scrolls to William H. Brownlee, an ASOR fellow. Trever further noted in the lines he had copied from the first scroll the double occurrence of an unusual negative construction in Hebrew. In addition, the Hebrew script of the scrolls was more archaic than anything he had ever seen.<\/p>\n<p>Trever then visited St Mark’s Monastery. There he was introduced to the Syrian archbishop Athanasius Samuel, who gave him permission to photograph the scrolls. Trever and Brownlee compared the style of handwriting on the scrolls with a photograph of the Nash Papyrus, a scroll inscribed with the Ten Commandments and Deuteronomy 6:4 and dated by scholars in the first or second century <span>BC<\/span>. The two ASOR scholars concluded that the script on the newly found manuscripts belonged to the same period. When ASOR director Millar Burrows returned to Jerusalem from Baghdad a few days later, he was shown the scrolls, and the three men continued their investigation. Only then did the Syrians reveal that the scrolls had been purchased the year before, in 1947, and had not been in the monastery for 40 years as was first reported.<\/p>\n<p>How had the Syrians come to possess the scrolls? Before that question could be answered, many fragmentary accounts had to be pieced together. Sometime during the winter of 1946–47 three Bedouin were tending their sheep and goats near a spring in the vicinity of Wadi Qumran. One of the herdsmen, throwing a rock through a small opening in the cliff, heard the sound of the rock evidently shattering an earthenware jar inside. Another Bedouin later lowered himself into the cave and found ten tall jars lining the walls. Three manuscripts (one of them in four pieces) stored in two of the jars were removed from the cave and offered to an antiquities dealer in Bethlehem.<\/p>\n<p>Several months later the Bedouin secured four more scrolls (one of them in two pieces) from the cave and sold them to another dealer in Bethlehem. During Holy Week in 1947, St Mark’s Syrian Orthodox Monastery in Jerusalem was informed of the four scrolls, and Metropolitan Athanasius Samuel offered to buy them. The sale was not completed, however, until July 1947, when the four scrolls were bought by the monastery. They included a complete Isaiah scroll, a commentary on Habakkuk, a scroll containing a Manual of Discipline of the religious community at Qumran, and the Genesis Apocryphon (originally thought to be the aprocryphal book of Lamech but actually an Aramaic paraphrase of Genesis).<\/p>\n<p>In November and December of 1947 an Armenian antiquities dealer in Jerusalem informed the late E. L. Sukenik, professor of archaeology at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, of the first three scrolls found in the cave by the Bedouin. Sukenik then secured the three scrolls and two jars from the antiquities dealer in Bethlehem. They included an incomplete scroll of Isaiah, the Hymns of Thanksgiving (containing 12 columns of original psalms), and the War Scroll. (That scroll describes a war, actual or spiritual, of the tribes of Levi, Judah, and Benjamin against the Moabites and Edomites. <em>See<\/em> War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness.)<\/p>\n<p>On April 1, 1948, the first news release appeared in newspapers around the world, followed by another news release on April 26 by Sukenik about the manuscripts he had already acquired at Hebrew University. In 1949 Athanasius Samuel brought the four scrolls from St Mark’s Monastery to the United States. They were exhibited in various places and finally were purchased on July 1, 1954, in New York for $250,000 by Sukenik’s son for the nation of Israel and sent to Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Today they are on display in the Shrine of the Book museum in West Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Because of the importance of the initial discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, both archaeologists and Bedouin continued their search for more manuscripts. Early in 1949, G. Lankester Harding, director of antiquities for the kingdom of Jordan, and Roland G. de Vaux, of the Dominic Ecole Biblique in Jerusalem, excavated the cave (designated Cave One, or 1Q) where the initial discovery was made. Several hundred caves were explored the same year. So far, 11 caves in the Wadi Qumran have yielded treasures. Almost 600 manuscripts have been recovered, about 200 of which are biblical material. The fragments number between 50,000 and 60,000 pieces. About 85 percent of the fragments are leather; the other 15 percent are papyrus. The fact that most of the manuscripts are leather contributed to the problem of their preservation.<\/p>\n<p>Probably the cave next most important to Cave One is Cave Four (4Q), which has yielded about 40,000 fragments of 400 different manuscripts, 100 of which are biblical. Every book of the OT except Esther is represented.<\/p>\n\n<p>In addition to the biblical manuscripts the discoveries have included apocryphal works such as Hebrew and Aramaic fragments of Tobit, Ecclesiasticus, and the Letter of Jeremiah. Fragments were also found of pseudepigraphal books such as 1 Enoch, the book of Jubilees, and the Testament of Levi.<\/p>\n<p>Many sectarian scrolls peculiar to the religious community that lived at Qumran were also found. They furnish historical background on the nature of pre-Christian Judaism and help fill in the gaps of intertestamental history. One of the scrolls, the Damascus Document, had originally turned up in Cairo, but manuscripts of it have now been found at Qumran. The Manual of Discipline was one of the seven scrolls from Cave One. Fragmentary manuscripts of it have been found in other caves. The document gives the group’s entrance requirements, plus regulations governing life in the Qumran community. The Thanksgiving Hymns include some 30 hymns, probably composed by one individual.<\/p>\n<p>There were also many commentaries on different books of the OT. The Habakkuk Commentary was a copy of the first two chapters of Habakkuk in Hebrew accompanied by a verse-by-verse commentary. The commentary gives many details about an apocalyptic figure called the “Teacher of Righteousness” who is persecuted by a wicked priest.<\/p>\n<p>A unique discovery was made in Cave Three (3Q) in 1952. It was a scroll of copper, measuring about eight feet (2.4 meters) long and a foot (30.5 centimeters) wide. Because it was brittle, it was not opened until 1966, and then only by cutting it into strips. It contained an inventory of some 60 locations where treasures of gold, silver, and incense were hidden. Archaeologists have not been able to find any of it. That list of treasures, perhaps from the Jerusalem temple, may have been stored in the cave by Zealots (a revolutionary Jewish political party) during their struggle with the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 66–70.<\/p>\n<p>During the Six-Day War in June 1967, Sukenik’s son, Yigael Yadin of the Hebrew University, acquired a Qumran document called the Temple Scroll. That tightly rolled scroll measures 28 feet (8.5 meters) and is the longest scroll found so far in the Qumran area. A major portion of it is devoted to statutes of the kings and matters of defense. It also describes sacrificial feasts and rules of cleanliness. Almost half of the scroll gives detailed instructions for building a future temple, supposedly revealed by God to the scroll’s author.<\/p>\n<h5>Important Dead Sea Scroll Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<p>Among the hundreds of biblical manuscripts discovered in the 11 caves around the Dead Sea, there are some very significant ones—especially for textual studies. These are listed below. (The first number signifies the cave, Q indicates Qumran, the abbreviation for the biblical book follows, often followed by a superscipt letter for successive manuscripts containing the same book.)<\/p>\n<h6>1QIsa<span>a<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>This is the first Dead Sea Scroll to receive widespread attention. It is dated to c. 100 <span>BC<\/span>. The text, which includes most of Isaiah, is proto-Masoretic with some significant variants.<\/p>\n<h6>1QIsa<span>b<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>The text, which includes most of Isaiah, is proto-Masoretic. It is dated to a period from 25 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 50.<\/p>\n<h6>2QJer<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript is dated to a period from 25 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 50 and has portions of Jeremiah chapters 42–49. It has some readings that follow the Septuagint (LXX), while it follows the order of chapters found in proto-Masoretic texts. For the book of Jeremiah, the Septuagint and Masoretic Text are quite different: the Septuagint is one-eighth shorter and has a different arrangement of chapters.<\/p>\n<h6>4QPaleoExod<span>m<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, containing most of Exodus, is dated quite early: 200–175 <span>BC<\/span>. As such, it has provided scholars with some interesting insights into the early history of textual transmission of Exodus and the Pentateuch. The manuscript shows many similarities with the Samaritan Pentateuch.<\/p>\n<h6>4QNum<span>b<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated 30 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20, contains most of Numbers. The book of Numbers existed in three distinguishable textual traditions: the Masoretic Text, the Samaritan Pentateuch, and the Septuagint. This manuscript, 4QNum<span>b<\/span>, shows similarities with the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint, while having its own unique readings.<\/p>\n\n<h6>4QSam<span>a<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, containing about one tenth of 1 and 2 Samuel, is dated c. 50–25 <span>BC<\/span>. This manuscript, showing some similarities with the Septuagint, is believed to have several readings that are superior to the Masoretic Text.<\/p>\n<h6>4QJer<span>a<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, containing portions of Jeremiah 7–22, dates c. 200 <span>BC<\/span>. It generally concurs with the Masoretic Text.<\/p>\n<h6>4QJer<span>b<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated c. 150–125 <span>BC<\/span>, follows the arrangement of the Septuagint, as well as its brevity. The significance of this is that two different texts of Jeremiah were used in the pre-Christian era—one that was proto-Masoretic (as with 4QJer<span>a<\/span>) and one that was like the Septuagint.<\/p>\n<h6>11QPs<span>a<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated c. <span>AD<\/span> 25–50, preserves many psalms. However, these are not in the traditional sequence found in the Hebrew Bible. Furthermore, the manuscript has several other psalms, some of which were known from other ancient versions and others that were unknown until they surfaced in this manuscript.<\/p>\n<h5>Scroll Discoveries at Wadi Murabba’at<\/h5>\n<p>In 1951 Bedouin discovered more manuscripts in caves in the Wadi Murabba’at, which extends southeast from Bethlehem toward the Dead Sea, about 11 miles (17.7 kilometers) south of Qumran. Four caves were excavated there in 1952 under Harding and de Vaux. They yielded biblical documents and important materials, such as letters and coins, from the time of the second Jewish revolt under Bar-Kochba in <span>AD<\/span> 132–135. Among the biblical manuscripts was a scroll containing a Hebrew text of the Minor Prophets, dating from the second century <span>AD<\/span>. This manuscript corresponds almost perfectly to the Masoretic Text, hinting that by the second century a standard consonantal text was already taking shape. Also found in Wadi Murabba’at were fragments of the Pentateuch (the five books of Moses) and Isaiah.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the Dead Sea Scrolls, ancient witnesses to the Hebrew OT that are actually written in the Hebrew language are almost nonexistent. Because of this, the Dead Sea Scrolls may easily be one of the greatest archaeological finds of all time. They take us 1,000 years deeper into the history of the Hebrew OT, giving us the ability to assess all the other ancient witnesses with greater understanding.<\/p>\n<p>The most frequently represented OT books among the Dead Sea Scrolls are Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy, Psalms, and Isaiah. The oldest text is a fragment of Exodus dating from about 250 <span>BC<\/span>. The Isaiah Scroll dates from about 100 <span>BC<\/span>. These ancient witnesses only confirm the accuracy of the Masoretic Text and the care with which the Jewish scribes handled the Scriptures. Except for a few instances where spelling and grammar differ between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic Text, the two are amazingly similar. The differences do not warrant any major changes in the substance of the OT. Yet these discoveries are helping biblical scholars gain a clearer understanding of the text at an earlier time in its history and development.<\/p>\n<p>Early conclusions about the antiquity of the first Dead Sea Scrolls were not accepted by everyone. Some scholars were convinced that the scrolls were of medieval origin. A series of questions relate to the dating problem. When were the texts at Qumran composed? When were they deposited in the caves? Most scholars believe the manuscripts were placed in the caves by members of the Qumran community when Roman legions were besieging Jewish strongholds. That was shortly before the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n\n<p>Careful study of the contents of a document sometimes reveals its authorship and the date when it was written. An example of using such internal evidence for dating a nonbiblical work is found in the Habakkuk Commentary. It gives hints about the people and events in the days of the commentary’s author, not in the days of the prophet Habakkuk. The commentator described the enemies of God’s people as the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Kittim<\/span><em>.<\/em> Originally that word denoted Cyprus but later came to be more generally the Greek islands and the coasts of the eastern Mediterranean. In Daniel 11:30 the term is used prophetically, and most scholars identify the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Kittim<\/span> with the Romans. Thus, the Habakkuk Commentary was probably written about the time of the Roman capture of Palestine under Pompey in 63 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n\n<p>Another important item to consider when dating a manuscript is its copy date. Although the vast majority of manuscripts are undated, it is often possible to determine when a manuscript was written by paleography, the study of ancient handwriting. That was the method initially employed by Trever when he compared the script of the Isaiah Scroll with the Nash Papyrus, thus dating it to the pre-Christian era. His conclusions were confirmed by the late William F. Albright, then the foremost American archaeologist. During the time of the Babylonian captivity, the square script became the normal style of writing in Hebrew (as well as in Aramaic, a cousin of Hebrew). The evidence of paleography clearly dates the majority of the Qumran scrolls in the period between 200 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 200.<\/p>\n<p>Archaeology provides another kind of external evidence. The pottery discovered at Qumran dates from the late Hellenistic and early Roman periods (200 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 100). Earthenware articles and ornaments point to the same period. Several hundred coins were found in jars dating from the Graeco-Roman period. A crack in one of the buildings is attributed to an earthquake that, according to Josephus (a Jewish historian who wrote during the first century <span>AD<\/span>), occurred in 31 <span>BC<\/span>. The excavations at Khirbet Qumran indicate that the general period of their occupation was from about 135 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 68, the year the Zealot revolt was crushed by Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, radiocarbon analysis has contributed to dating the finds. Radiocarbon analysis is a method of dating material from the amount of radioactive carbon remaining in it. The process is also known as carbon-14 dating. Applied to the linen cloth in which the scrolls were wrapped, the analysis gave a date of <span>AD<\/span> 33 plus or minus 200 years. A later test bracketed the date between 250 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 50. Although there may be questions concerning the relation of the linen wrappings to the date of the scrolls themselves, the carbon-14 test agrees with the conclusions of both paleography and archaeology. The general period, then, in which the Dead Sea Scrolls can be safely dated is between about 150 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 68.<\/p>\n<h5>The Nash Papyrus<\/h5>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the oldest Hebrew witness to the OT was the Nash Papyrus. This manuscript was acquired in Egypt by W. L. Nash in 1902 and was donated to the Cambridge University Library. This manuscript contains a damaged copy of the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:2-17), part of Deuteronomy 5:6-21, and also the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shema<\/span> (Dt 6:4ff.). This is clearly a collection of devotional and liturgical passages, and has been dated to the same period as the Dead Sea Scrolls, between 150 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 68.<\/p>\n<h5>The Cairo Geniza Fragments<\/h5>\n<p>Near the end of the 19th century, many fragments from the 6th to the 8th centuries were found in an old synagogue in Cairo, Egypt, which had been St Michael’s Church until <span>AD<\/span> 882. They were found there in a geniza, a storage room where worn or faulty manuscripts were hidden until they could be disposed of properly. This geniza had apparently been walled off and forgotten until its recent discovery. In this small room, as many as 200,000 fragments were preserved, including biblical texts in Hebrew and Aramaic. The fact that the biblical fragments date from the 5th century <span>AD<\/span> makes them invaluable for shedding light on the development of the Masoretic work prior to the standardization instituted by the great Masoretes of Tiberias.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificantOldTestamentVersions\">Significant Old Testament Versions<\/p>\n<h5>The Samaritan Pentateuch<\/h5>\n<p>Exactly when the Samaritan community separated from the larger Jewish community is a matter of dispute. But at some point during the postexilic period (c. 540–100 <span>BC<\/span>), a clear division between Samaritans and Jews was marked off. At this point, the Samaritans, who accepted only the Pentateuch as canonical, apparently canonized their own particular version of the Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>A copy of the Samaritan Pentateuch came to the attention of scholars in 1616. Initially, it caused a great deal of excitement, but most of the early assessments of its value to textual criticism were negative. It differed from the Masoretic Text in some 6,000 instances, and many judged this to be the result of sectarian differences between Samaritans and Jews. By some, it was simply viewed as a sectarian revision of the Masoretic Text.<\/p>\n<p>After further assessment, however, it became clear that the Samaritan Pentateuch represented a text of much earlier origin than the Masoretic Text. And although a few of the distinctions of the Samaritan Pentateuch were clearly the result of sectarian concerns, most of the differences were neutral in this respect. Many of them had more to do with popularizing the text, rather than altering its meaning in any way. The fact that the Samaritan Pentateuch had much in common with the Septuagint, some of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the NT, revealed that most of its differences with the Masoretic Text were not due to sectarian differences. More likely, they were due to the use of a different textual base, which was probably in wide use in the ancient Near East until well after the time of Christ. This realization, though not solving any real problems, did much to illustrate the complexity of the OT textual tradition that existed before the Masoretic standard was completed.<\/p>\n<h5>The Septuagint (LXX)<\/h5>\n\n<p>The Septuagint is the oldest Greek translation of the OT, its witness being significantly older than that of the Masoretic Text. According to tradition, the Septuagint Pentateuch was translated by a team of 70 scholars in Alexandria, Egypt. (Hence its common designation LXX, the Roman numerals for 70.) The Jewish community in Egypt spoke Greek, not Hebrew, so a Greek translation of the OT was sincerely needed by that community of Jews. The exact date of translation is not known, but evidence indicates that the Septuagint Pentateuch was completed in the third century <span>BC<\/span>. The rest of the OT was probably translated over a long period of time, as it clearly represents the work of many different scholars.<\/p>\n<p>The value of the Septuagint to textual criticism varies widely from book to book. It might be said that the Septuagint is not a single version but a collection of versions made by various authors, who differed greatly in their methods and their knowledge of Hebrew. The translations of the individual books are in no way uniform. Many books are translated almost literally, while others like Job and Daniel are quite dynamic. So the value of each book for textual criticism must be assessed on a book-by-book basis. The books translated literally are clearly more helpful in making comparisons with the Masoretic Text than the more dynamic ones.<\/p>\n<p>The content of some books is significantly different when comparing the Septuagint and the Masoretic Text. For example, the Septuagint’s Jeremiah is missing significant portions found in the Masoretic Text, and the order of the text is significantly different as well. What these differences actually mean is difficult to know with certainty. It has been conjectured that the Septuagint is simply a poor translation and is therefore missing portions of the original Hebrew. But these same differences could also indicate that editorial additions and changes worked their way into the Masoretic Text during its long history of development. It is also possible that there were a number of valid textual traditions at that time, one followed by the Septuagint, and another followed by the Masoretic Text. This illustrates some of the difficulties that arise while doing OT textual criticism.<\/p>\n<p>The Septuagint was the standard OT text used by the early Christian church. The expanding Gentile church needed a translation in the common language of the time—Greek. By the time of Christ, even among the Jews, a majority of the people spoke Aramaic and Greek, not Hebrew. The NT writers evidence their inclination to the Septuagint by using it when quoting the OT.<\/p>\n<h5>Other Greek Versions<\/h5>\n<p>Because of the broad acceptance and use of the Septuagint among Christians, the Jews renounced it in favor of a number of other Greek versions. Aquila, a proselyte and disciple of Rabbi Akiba, produced a new translation around <span>AD<\/span> 130. In the spirit of his teacher, Aquila wrote an extremely literal translation, often to the point of communicating poorly in Greek. This literal approach, however, gained this version wide acceptance among Jews. Only fragments of this version have survived, but its literal nature reveals much about its Hebrew textual base.<\/p>\n<p>Symmachus produced a new version around <span>AD<\/span> 170 designed not only for accuracy but also to communicate well in the Greek language. His version has survived only in a few <em>Hexapla<\/em> fragments. A third Greek version came from Theodotion, a Jewish proselyte from the end of the second century <span>AD<\/span>. His version was apparently a revision of an earlier Greek version, possibly the Septuagint. This version has survived only in a few early Christian quotations, though it was once widely used.<\/p>\n<p>The Christian theologian Origen (c. <span>AD<\/span> 185–255) arranged the OT with six parallel versions for comparison in his <em>Hexapla.<\/em> In his effort to find the best text of the Septuagint, Origen wrote out six parallel columns containing first the Hebrew, second the Hebrew transliterated into Greek characters, third the text of Aquila, fourth the text of Symmachus, fifth his own corrected Septuagint text, sixth the text of Theodotion. Jerome used this great Bible at Caesarea in his work on the Vulgate (after 382—see below). Almost four centuries after Origen’s death, a Mesopotamian bishop, Paul of Tella, also used the <em>Hexapla<\/em> in the library at Caesarea (616–17) to make a translation into Syriac of Origen’s fifth column, the corrected Septuagint. Then in 638 the Islamic hordes swept through Caesarea and the <em>Hexapla<\/em> disappeared. Other than a few fragments, only Bishop Paul’s Syriac translation of Origen’s fifth column remains.<\/p>\n<p>An eighth-century copy of Bishop Paul’s Syriac <em>Hexapla<\/em> Septuagint is extant in a Milan museum. Other famous uncial manuscripts of the Septuagint are the codices: Vaticanus, early fourth century, now in the Vatican Library; Sinaiticus, mid-fourth century; and Alexandrinus, probably from the fifth century—both of the latter are in London’s British Museum. These copies are intensely studied because they bear a Greek witness to Hebrew texts far earlier than the Masoretic or “received text.”<\/p>\n<h5>The Aramaic Targums<\/h5>\n<p>The Aramaic Targums were Aramaic translations of the Hebrew OT. Since the common language of the Jews during the postexilic period was Aramaic and not Hebrew, a need for Aramaic translations of the Hebrew Bible arose. Hebrew remained the language of scholarly religious circles, and translations for the common people were often spurned by the religious leadership. But over time, the reading of the Scriptures and commentaries in Aramaic became an accepted practice in the synagogues.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of these translations was to get the message across and to edify the people. Thus, the translations were extremely interpretive. The translators paraphrased, added explanatory glosses, and often boldly reinterpreted the text according to the theological biases of their time. They sought to relate the Bible text to contemporary life and political circumstances. Because of the dynamic approach evident in these translations, their use in textual criticism is limited, but they do add to the welter of evidence to be collected and collated in order to reconstruct the text of the OT.<\/p>\n<h5>The Syriac Version<\/h5>\n<p>Another version worthy of note is the Syriac version. This version was in common use in the Syriac (eastern Aramaic) church, which designated it the <em>Peshitta,<\/em> meaning “the simple or plain.” What they intended by this designation is difficult to discern. It may indicate that it was intended for popular consumption, or that it avoided adding explanatory glosses and other additions, or perhaps that it was not an annotated text, as was the annotated <em>Syro-Hexapla<\/em> then in use by the same community.<\/p>\n<p>The literary history of the Syriac version is not known, though it is clearly complex. Some have identified it as the recasting of an Aramaic Targum in Syriac, while others claim it has a more independent origin. Some connect it to the conversion of the leaders of Adiabene (east of the Tigris River) to the Jewish faith during the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Their need for an OT could have brought about the development of a version in their common tongue—Syriac. Still others connect it to Christian origins. Obvious later revisions to the <em>Peshitta<\/em> complicate matters even more. More study needs to be done to assess the nature of this version before it can lend much insight into the history of the Hebrew text.<\/p>\n<h5>The Latin Versions<\/h5>\n<p>Latin was a dominant language in western regions of the Roman Empire from well before the time of Christ. It was in the western regions of southern Gaul and North Africa that the first Latin translations of the Bible appeared. Around <span>AD<\/span> 160 Tertullian apparently used a Latin version of the Scriptures. Not long after this, the Old Latin text seems to have been in circulation, evidenced by Cyprian’s use of it before his death in <span>AD<\/span> 258. The Old Latin version was translated from the Septuagint. Due to its early date, it is valuable as a witness to the early Septuagint text, before later editors obscured the nature of the original. It also indirectly gives clues to the nature of the Hebrew text at the time of the Septuagint’s translation. Complete manuscripts of the Old Latin text have not survived. After the completion of Jerome’s Latin version, the Vulgate, the older text fell into disuse. Enough fragmentary manuscripts of this version do exist, however, to lend significant information to the early OT text.<\/p>\n<p>Around the third century <span>AD<\/span>, Latin began to replace Greek as the language of learning in the larger Roman world. A uniform, reliable text was badly needed for theological and liturgical uses. To fill this need, Pope Damasus I (<span>AD<\/span> 336–84) commissioned Jerome, an eminent scholar in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, to undertake the translation. Jerome began this work as a translation from the Greek Septuagint, considered inspired by many church authorities, including Augustine. But later, and at the risk of great criticism, he turned to the Hebrew text being used in Palestine at that time as the base text for his translation. During the years between <span>AD<\/span> 390 and 405 Jerome wrote his Latin translation of the Hebrew OT. Yet, despite Jerome’s return to the original Hebrew, he was heavily dependent on the various Greek versions as aids in translation. As a result the Vulgate reflects the other Greek and Latin translations as much as the underlying Hebrew text. The value of the Vulgate for textual criticism is its pre-Masoretic witness to the Hebrew Bible, though this was compromised to a great extent by the influence of already existing Greek translations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheOldTestament\">The Text of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The task of the textual critic can be divided into a number of general stages: (1) the collection and collation of existing manuscripts, translations, and quotations; (2) the development of theory and methodology that will enable the critic to use the gathered information to reconstruct the most accurate text of the biblical materials; (3) the reconstruction of the history of the transmission of the text in order to identify the various influences affecting the text; (4) the evaluation of specific variant readings in light of textual evidence, theology, and history.<\/p>\n<p>Both OT and NT textual critics undertake a similar task and face similar obstacles. They both seek to unearth a hypothetical “original” text with limited resources that are at varying degrees of deterioration. But the OT textual critic faces a more complex textual history than does his NT counterpart. The NT was written primarily in the first century <span>AD<\/span>, and complete NT manuscripts exist that were written only a few hundred years later. The OT, however, is made up of literature written over a 1,000-year period, the oldest parts dating to the 12th century <span>BC<\/span>, or possibly even earlier. To make matters even more difficult, until recently, the earliest known Hebrew manuscripts of the OT were medieval. This left scholars with little witness as to the OT’s textual development from ancient times to the Middle Ages, a period of over 2,000 years.<\/p>\n<p>Until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the 1940s and 1950s, secondary Aramaic, Greek, and Latin translations served as the earliest significant witnesses to the early Hebrew Scriptures. Since these are translations, and subject to sectarian and contextual alterations and interpolations, their value to the textual critic, though significant, is limited. The recent discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls and other early manuscripts, however, have provided primary witnesses to the Hebrew OT in earlier times. The scholarly assessment of these discoveries is, at present, far from complete, and the discipline of OT textual criticism anxiously awaits a more complete assessment of their significance. In a general sense, however, the Dead Sea Scrolls have affirmed the accuracy of the Masoretic Text that we use today.<\/p>\n<p>Reconstruction of the history of the transmission of the text is an important element in evaluating variant readings. Material from a wide variety of sources must be combined in order to arrive at even a tentative reconstruction of the text. A brief sketch of scholarly opinion follows.<\/p>\n<p>The early history of the OT text as reflected in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Septuagint, and the ancient Hebrew text shows a remarkable fluidity and diversity. Evidently the standardizing process did not begin at the earliest stages. For example, the materials from the Qumran community, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, do not reflect any frustration with varying texts within that community.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars have attempted to account for such diversity by theories of local texts. They theorize that various localities in the Near East (e.g., Babylon, Palestine, Egypt) had differing text types that are reflected in the various surviving Hebrew texts and versions. Other scholars account for the diversity by recognizing a precanonical fluidity. They feel that until the process of canonization was complete, accurate reproduction of the manuscripts was not viewed as very important. It should be noted, however, that the basic text that modern scholarship has identified as closest to the original was among the Dead Sea texts (for example, the large Isaiah Scroll).<\/p>\n<p>Destruction of the temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 provided an impetus for standardization of the consonantal text. The texts found at Wadi Murabba’at, copied during the first centuries <span>AD<\/span>, reflect the new stage. The scholars initially reporting on the discovery were disappointed to find in these texts so few variations from the standard Masoretic Text. To scholars, the very early texts from the Dead Sea Scroll discoveries had become the standard consonantal text to the exclusion of other variants. Scholars have now gone so far as to identify the only slightly later Wadi Murabba’at texts as a “proto-Masoretic” standard. This seems to indicate that the Hebrew consonantal text was already approaching a standard in Palestine by the first centuries <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Standardization as practiced by the Masoretes meant identifying one text as normative and copying carefully from that text. It also meant correcting existing texts by the normative text. The Hebrew text, of course, was written with consonants alone, not with consonants <em>and<\/em> vowels, as we write English.<\/p>\n<p>The next stage in the transmission of the OT text was standardization of punctuation and vowel patterns. That process, which began fairly early in the NT period, extended over a period of 1,000 years. A long series of Masoretes provided annotations known as <em>Masora,<\/em> which, in Hebrew, means “tradition.” Two different motivations are evident in their work. One was their concern for accurate reproduction of the consonantal text. For that purpose a collection of annotations (on irregular forms, abnormal patterns, the number of times a form or word was used, and other matters) was gathered and inserted in the margins or at the end of the text.<\/p>\n<p>A second concern of the Masoretes was to record and standardize the vocalization of the consonantal text for reading purposes. Up until this point, scribes had been prohibited against inserting vowels to make the vocalization of the text clear. Because of this, a proper reading of the text depended on the oral tradition passed down from generation to generation. The origins of vocalization reflect differences between Babylon and Palestine. The Tiberian Masoretes (scholars working in Tiberias in Palestine) provided the most complete and exact system of vocalization. The earliest dated manuscript from that tradition is a codex of the Prophets from the Karaite synagogue of Cairo dated <span>AD<\/span> 896. Today the standard Hebrew text of the OT, <em>Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia,<\/em> an updated version of Kittel’s <em>Biblia Hebraica,<\/em> is constructed on the basis of the Tiberian Masoretic tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Standardization of both the consonantal text and vocalization succeeded so well that the manuscripts that have survived display a remarkable agreement. Most of the variants, being minor and attributable to scribal error, do not affect interpretation.<\/p>\n<h5>Methodology of Old Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>The search for an adequate methodology to handle the many variant readings found in manuscripts is inseparably intertwined with our understanding of the history of transmission. The basic issue in textual criticism is the method used to decide the relative value of those variant readings. Many factors must be evaluated in order to arrive at a valid decision.<\/p>\n<p>Modern science has provided a number of aids for deciphering a manuscript. Scientific dating procedures help to determine the age of the writing material. Chemical techniques help clarify writing that has deteriorated. Ultraviolet light enables a scholar to see traces of ink (carbon) in a manuscript even after the surface writing has been effaced.<\/p>\n<p>Each manuscript must be studied as a whole, for each has a “personality.” It is important to identify the characteristic errors, characteristic carelessness or carefulness, and other peculiarities of the scribe(s) who copied the material. Then the manuscript must be compared with other manuscripts to identify the “family” tradition with which it agrees. Preservation of common errors or insertions in the text is a clue to relationships. All possible details of date, place of origin, and authorship must be ascertained.<\/p>\n<p>Scribal errors fall into several distinct categories. The first large category is that of <em>unintentional errors:<\/em> (1) Confusion of similar consonants and the transposition of two consonants are frequent errors. (2) Corruptions also resulted from an incorrect division of words (many early manuscripts omitted spaces between words in order to save space). (3) Confusion of sounds occurred particularly when one scribe read to a group of scribes making multiple copies. (4) In the OT, the method of vocalization (addition of vowels to the consonantal text) created some errors. (5) Omissions of a letter, word, or phrase created new readings. (6) Repetition of a letter, word, or even a whole phrase was also common. (7) Omission (called haplography) or repetition (called dittography) could be caused by the eye of a scribe slipping from one word to a similar word or ending. (8) Omissions by <em>homoioteleuton<\/em> (Greek meaning “similar endings”) were also quite common. This occurred when two words that were identical, similar, or had identical endings were found close to each other, and the eye of the copyist moved from the first to the second, omitting the words between them. (9) In the OT, errors were at times caused by the use of consonants as vowel letters in some ancient texts. Copyists unaware of this usage of vowel letters would copy them in as aberrant consonants. Normally unintentional errors are fairly easy to identify because they create nonsense readings.<\/p>\n<p><em>Intentional errors<\/em> are much more difficult to identify and evaluate. Harmonizations from similar materials occurred with regularity. Difficult readings were subject to “improvement” by a thinking scribe. Objectionable expressions were sometimes eliminated or smoothed out. Occasionally synonyms were employed. Conflation (resolving a discrepancy between two variant readings by including both of them) often appears.<\/p>\n<p>Awareness of these common problems is the first step in detecting and eliminating the more obvious errors and identifying and eliminating the peculiarities of a particular scribe. Then more subtle criteria for identifying the reading most likely to be the original must be employed. Procedures for applying such criteria are similar in both OT and NT work.<\/p>\n<h5>General Methodological Principles<\/h5>\n<p>Through the work of textual critics in the last several centuries, certain basic principles have evolved. The primary principles for the OT can be briefly summarized.<\/p>\n<p>1. The basic text for primary consideration is the Masoretic Text because of the careful standardization it represents. That text is compared with the testimony of the ancient versions. The Septuagint, by reason of age and basic faithfulness to the Hebrew text, carries significant weight in all decisions. The Targums (Aramaic translations) also reflect the Hebrew base but exhibit a tendency to expansion and paraphrase. The Syriac (<em>Peshitta<\/em>), Vulgate (Latin), Old Latin, and Coptic versions add indirect evidence, although translations are not always clear witnesses in technical details. Use of such versions does enable scholars to use comparative philology in textual decisions and thus expose early errors for which the original reading probably has not survived.<\/p>\n<li>2. The reading that best explains the origin of other variants is preferable. Information from reconstruction of the history of transmission often provides additional insight. Knowledge of typical scribal errors enables the critic to make an educated decision on the sequence of variants.<\/li>\n<li>3. The shorter reading is preferable. The scribes frequently added material in order to solve style or syntax problems and seldom abridged or condensed material.<\/li>\n<li>4. The more difficult reading is more likely to be the original one. This principle is closely related to the third. Scribes did not intentionally create more complex readings. Unintentional errors are usually easy to identify. Thus the easier reading is normally suspect as a scribal alteration.<\/li>\n<li>5. Readings that are not harmonized or assimilated to similar passages are preferable. Copyists had a tendency to correct material on the basis of similar material elsewhere (sometimes even unconsciously).<\/li>\n<li>6. When all else fails, the textual critic must resort to conjectural emendation. To make an “educated guess” requires intimate acquaintance with the Hebrew language, familiarity with the author’s style, and an understanding of culture, customs, and theology that might color the passage. Use of conjecture must be limited to those passages in which the original reading has definitely not been transmitted to us.<\/li>\n<h5>Conclusion<\/h5>\n<p>It should be remembered that textual criticism operates only when two or more readings are possible for a specific word or phrase. For most of the biblical text, a single reading has been transmitted. Elimination of scribal errors and intentional changes leaves only a small percentage of the text about which any questions occur.<\/p>\n<p>The field of textual criticism is complex, requiring the gathering and skillful use of a wide variety of information. Because it deals with the authoritative source of revelation for all Christians, textual argumentation has often been accompanied by emotion. Yet in spite of controversy, great progress has been made, particularly in the last century. Refinement of methodology has greatly aided our understanding of the accumulated materials. Additional aid has come from accumulations of information in related fields of study such as church history, biblical theology, and the history of Christian thought.<\/p>\n<p>Collection and organization of all variant readings have enabled modern textual critics to give strong assurance that the Word of God has been transmitted in accurate and dependable form. Although variant readings have become obvious through the publication of so many manuscripts, inadequate, inferior, and secondary readings have been largely eliminated. In relatively few places is conjectural emendation necessary. In matters pertaining to the Christian’s salvation, clear and unmistakable transmission provides authoritative answers. Christians are thus in debt to the textual critics who have worked, and are working, to provide a dependable biblical text.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (Old Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the OT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. The ancient manuscripts of the OT are the basic working material used to seek out the original text of the Bible with as great a degree of accuracy as possible. This process is called textual criticism, sometimes designated “lower criticism” to distinguish it from “higher criticism,” which is analysis of the date, unity, and authorship of the biblical writings.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Old Testament Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Significant Old Testament Versions<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantOldTestamentManuscripts\">Important Old Testament Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Most medieval manuscripts of the OT exhibit a fairly standardized form of the Hebrew text. This standardization reflects the work of the medieval scribes known as Masoretes (<span>AD<\/span> 500–900); the text that resulted from their work is called the Masoretic Text. Most of the important manuscripts dated from the 11th century <span>AD<\/span> or later all reflect this same basic textual tradition. But since the Masoretic Text did not stabilize until well after <span>AD<\/span> 500, many questions about its development in the preceding centuries could not be answered. So the primary task for OT textual critics has been to compare earlier witnesses in order to discover how the Masoretic Text came to be, and how it and earlier witnesses of the Hebrew Bible are related. This leads us to the initial task of textual criticism: the collection of all possible records of the biblical writings.<\/p>\n<p>All the primary sources of the Hebrew Scriptures are handwritten manuscripts, usually written on animal skins, papyrus, or sometimes metal. The fact that they are handwritten is the source of many difficulties for the textual critic. Human error and editorial tampering are often to blame for the many variant readings in OT and NT manuscripts. The fact that the ancient manuscripts are written on skins or papyrus is another source of difficulty. Due to natural decay, most of the surviving ancient manuscripts are fragmentary and difficult to read.<\/p>\n<p>There are many secondary witnesses to the ancient OT text, including translations into other languages, quotations used by both friends and enemies of biblical religion, and evidence from early printed texts. Most of the secondary witnesses have suffered in ways similar to the primary ones. They, too, contain numerous variants due to both intentional and accidental scribal errors and are fragmentary as a result of natural decay. Since variant readings do exist in the surviving ancient manuscripts, these must be collected and compared. The task of comparing and listing the variant readings is known as collation.<\/p>\n<h5>Manuscripts with the Masoretic Text<\/h5>\n<p>The textual history of the Masoretic Text is a significant story in its own right. This text of the Hebrew Bible is the most complete in existence. It forms the basis for our modern Hebrew Bibles and is the prototype against which all comparisons are made in OT textual studies. It is called Masoretic because in its present form it is based on the <em>Masora,<\/em> the textual tradition of the Jewish scholars known as the Masoretes of Tiberias. (Tiberias was the location of their community on the Sea of Galilee.) The Masoretes, whose school flourished between <span>AD<\/span> 500 and 1000, standardized the traditional consonantal text by adding vowel pointing and marginal notes. (The ancient Hebrew alphabet had no vowels.)<\/p>\n<p>The Masoretic Text, as it exists today, owes much to the Ben Asher family. For five or six generations, from the second half of the eighth century to the middle of the tenth century <span>AD<\/span>, this family played a leading role in the Masoretic work at Tiberias. A faithful record of their work can be found in the oldest existing Masoretic manuscripts, which go back to the final two members of that family. The oldest dated Masoretic manuscript is Codex Cairensis (<span>AD<\/span> 895), which is attributed to Moses ben Asher. This manuscript contained both the Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) and the Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 12 Minor Prophets). The rest of the OT is missing from this manuscript.<\/p>\n<p>The other major surviving manuscript attributed to the Ben Asher family is the Aleppo Codex. According to the manuscript’s concluding note, Aaron ben Moses ben Asher was responsible for writing the Masoretic notes and pointing the text. This manuscript contained the entire OT and dates from the first half of the 10th century <span>AD<\/span>. It was reportedly destroyed in anti-Jewish riots in 1947, but this proved to be only partly true. A majority of the manuscript survived and will be used as the base for a new critical edition of the Hebrew Bible to be published by the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript known as Codex Leningradensis, presently stored in the Leningrad Public Library, is of special importance as a witness to the Ben Asher text. According to a note on the manuscript, it was copied in <span>AD<\/span> 1008 from texts written by Aaron ben Moses ben Asher. Since the oldest complete Hebrew text of the OT (the Aleppo Codex) was not available to scholars earlier in this century, Codex Leningradensis was used as the textual base for the popular Hebrew texts of today: <em>Biblia Hebraica,<\/em> edited by R. Kittel, and its revision, <em>Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia,<\/em> edited by K. Elliger and W. Rudolf.<\/p>\n<p>There are quite a number of less important manuscript codices that reflect the Masoretic tradition: the Petersburg Codex of the Prophets and the Erfurt Codices. There are also a number of manuscripts that no longer exist but which were used by scholars in the Masoretic period. One of the most prominent is Codex Hillel, traditionally attributed to Rabbi Hillel ben Moses ben Hillel about <span>AD<\/span> 600. This codex was said to be very accurate and was used for the revision of other manuscripts. Readings of this codex are cited repeatedly by the early medieval Masoretes. Codex Muga, Codex Jericho, and Codex Jerushalmi, also no longer extant, were also cited by the Masoretes. These manuscripts were likely prominent examples of unpointed texts that had become part of a standardizing consensus in the first centuries <span>AD<\/span>. These laid the groundwork for the work of the Masoretes of Tiberias.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the completeness of the Masoretic manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible, a major problem still remains for OT textual critics. The Masoretic manuscripts, as old as they are, were written between 1,000 and 2,000 years after the original autographs. Earlier witnesses to the ancient Hebrew text were needed to testify to the accuracy of the Masoretic Text.<\/p>\n<h5>The Dead Sea Scrolls<\/h5>\n<p>The most important ancient witnesses to the Hebrew Bible are the texts discovered at Wadi Qumran in the 1940s and 1950s. (<em>Wadi<\/em> is an Arabic word for a riverbed that is dry except in the rainy season.) Before the Qumran discoveries, the oldest existing Hebrew manuscripts of the OT dated from about <span>AD<\/span> 900. The greatest importance of the Dead Sea Scrolls, therefore, lies in the discovery of biblical manuscripts dating back to only about 300 years after the close of the OT canon. That makes them 1,000 years earlier than the oldest manuscripts previously known to biblical scholars. The texts found at Wadi Qumran were all completed before the Roman conquest of Palestine in <span>AD<\/span> 70, and many predate this event by quite some time. Among the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Isaiah Scroll has received the most publicity, although the collection contains fragments of all the books in the Hebrew Bible with the exception of Esther.<\/p>\n<p>Because the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls is so important for OT textual criticism, a short history and description of these recent discoveries is appropriate. The manuscripts now known as the Dead Sea Scrolls are a collection of biblical and extrabiblical manuscripts from Qumran, an ancient Jewish religious community near the Dead Sea.<\/p>\n<p>Before the Qumran find, few manuscripts had been discovered in the Holy Land. The early church father Origen (third century <span>AD<\/span>) mentioned using Hebrew and Greek manuscripts that had been stored in jars in caves near Jericho. In the ninth century <span>AD<\/span> a patriarch of the eastern church, Timothy I, wrote a letter to Sergius, metropolitan (archbishop) of Elam, in which he, too, referred to a large number of Hebrew manuscripts found in a cave near Jericho. For more than 1,000 years since then, however, no other significant manuscript discoveries were forthcoming from caves in that region near the Dead Sea.<\/p>\n<h5>Scroll Discoveries at Wadi Qumran<\/h5>\n<p>The history of the Dead Sea manuscripts, both of their hiding and of their finding, reads like a mystery adventure story. It began with a telephone call on Wednesday afternoon, February 18, 1948, in the troubled city of Jerusalem. Butrus Sowmy, librarian and monk of St Mark’s Monastery in the Armenian quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem, was calling John C. Trever, acting director of the American Schools of Oriental Research (ASOR). Sowmy had been preparing a catalog of the monastery’s collection of rare books. Among them he found some scrolls in ancient Hebrew that, he said, had been in the monastery for about 40 years. Could ASOR supply him with some information for the catalog?<\/p>\n<p>The following day Sowmy and his brother brought a suitcase containing five scrolls or parts of scrolls wrapped in an Arabic newspaper. Pulling back the end of one of the scrolls Trever discovered that it was written in a clear, square Hebrew script. He copied several lines from that scroll, carefully examined three others, but was unable to unroll the fifth because it was too brittle. After the Syrians left, Trever told the story of the scrolls to William H. Brownlee, an ASOR fellow. Trever further noted in the lines he had copied from the first scroll the double occurrence of an unusual negative construction in Hebrew. In addition, the Hebrew script of the scrolls was more archaic than anything he had ever seen.<\/p>\n<p>Trever then visited St Mark’s Monastery. There he was introduced to the Syrian archbishop Athanasius Samuel, who gave him permission to photograph the scrolls. Trever and Brownlee compared the style of handwriting on the scrolls with a photograph of the Nash Papyrus, a scroll inscribed with the Ten Commandments and Deuteronomy 6:4 and dated by scholars in the first or second century <span>BC<\/span>. The two ASOR scholars concluded that the script on the newly found manuscripts belonged to the same period. When ASOR director Millar Burrows returned to Jerusalem from Baghdad a few days later, he was shown the scrolls, and the three men continued their investigation. Only then did the Syrians reveal that the scrolls had been purchased the year before, in 1947, and had not been in the monastery for 40 years as was first reported.<\/p>\n<p>How had the Syrians come to possess the scrolls? Before that question could be answered, many fragmentary accounts had to be pieced together. Sometime during the winter of 1946–47 three Bedouin were tending their sheep and goats near a spring in the vicinity of Wadi Qumran. One of the herdsmen, throwing a rock through a small opening in the cliff, heard the sound of the rock evidently shattering an earthenware jar inside. Another Bedouin later lowered himself into the cave and found ten tall jars lining the walls. Three manuscripts (one of them in four pieces) stored in two of the jars were removed from the cave and offered to an antiquities dealer in Bethlehem.<\/p>\n<p>Several months later the Bedouin secured four more scrolls (one of them in two pieces) from the cave and sold them to another dealer in Bethlehem. During Holy Week in 1947, St Mark’s Syrian Orthodox Monastery in Jerusalem was informed of the four scrolls, and Metropolitan Athanasius Samuel offered to buy them. The sale was not completed, however, until July 1947, when the four scrolls were bought by the monastery. They included a complete Isaiah scroll, a commentary on Habakkuk, a scroll containing a Manual of Discipline of the religious community at Qumran, and the Genesis Apocryphon (originally thought to be the aprocryphal book of Lamech but actually an Aramaic paraphrase of Genesis).<\/p>\n<p>In November and December of 1947 an Armenian antiquities dealer in Jerusalem informed the late E. L. Sukenik, professor of archaeology at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, of the first three scrolls found in the cave by the Bedouin. Sukenik then secured the three scrolls and two jars from the antiquities dealer in Bethlehem. They included an incomplete scroll of Isaiah, the Hymns of Thanksgiving (containing 12 columns of original psalms), and the War Scroll. (That scroll describes a war, actual or spiritual, of the tribes of Levi, Judah, and Benjamin against the Moabites and Edomites. <em>See<\/em> War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness.)<\/p>\n<p>On April 1, 1948, the first news release appeared in newspapers around the world, followed by another news release on April 26 by Sukenik about the manuscripts he had already acquired at Hebrew University. In 1949 Athanasius Samuel brought the four scrolls from St Mark’s Monastery to the United States. They were exhibited in various places and finally were purchased on July 1, 1954, in New York for $250,000 by Sukenik’s son for the nation of Israel and sent to Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Today they are on display in the Shrine of the Book museum in West Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Because of the importance of the initial discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, both archaeologists and Bedouin continued their search for more manuscripts. Early in 1949, G. Lankester Harding, director of antiquities for the kingdom of Jordan, and Roland G. de Vaux, of the Dominic Ecole Biblique in Jerusalem, excavated the cave (designated Cave One, or 1Q) where the initial discovery was made. Several hundred caves were explored the same year. So far, 11 caves in the Wadi Qumran have yielded treasures. Almost 600 manuscripts have been recovered, about 200 of which are biblical material. The fragments number between 50,000 and 60,000 pieces. About 85 percent of the fragments are leather; the other 15 percent are papyrus. The fact that most of the manuscripts are leather contributed to the problem of their preservation.<\/p>\n<p>Probably the cave next most important to Cave One is Cave Four (4Q), which has yielded about 40,000 fragments of 400 different manuscripts, 100 of which are biblical. Every book of the OT except Esther is represented.<\/p>\n\n<p>In addition to the biblical manuscripts the discoveries have included apocryphal works such as Hebrew and Aramaic fragments of Tobit, Ecclesiasticus, and the Letter of Jeremiah. Fragments were also found of pseudepigraphal books such as 1 Enoch, the book of Jubilees, and the Testament of Levi.<\/p>\n<p>Many sectarian scrolls peculiar to the religious community that lived at Qumran were also found. They furnish historical background on the nature of pre-Christian Judaism and help fill in the gaps of intertestamental history. One of the scrolls, the Damascus Document, had originally turned up in Cairo, but manuscripts of it have now been found at Qumran. The Manual of Discipline was one of the seven scrolls from Cave One. Fragmentary manuscripts of it have been found in other caves. The document gives the group’s entrance requirements, plus regulations governing life in the Qumran community. The Thanksgiving Hymns include some 30 hymns, probably composed by one individual.<\/p>\n<p>There were also many commentaries on different books of the OT. The Habakkuk Commentary was a copy of the first two chapters of Habakkuk in Hebrew accompanied by a verse-by-verse commentary. The commentary gives many details about an apocalyptic figure called the “Teacher of Righteousness” who is persecuted by a wicked priest.<\/p>\n<p>A unique discovery was made in Cave Three (3Q) in 1952. It was a scroll of copper, measuring about eight feet (2.4 meters) long and a foot (30.5 centimeters) wide. Because it was brittle, it was not opened until 1966, and then only by cutting it into strips. It contained an inventory of some 60 locations where treasures of gold, silver, and incense were hidden. Archaeologists have not been able to find any of it. That list of treasures, perhaps from the Jerusalem temple, may have been stored in the cave by Zealots (a revolutionary Jewish political party) during their struggle with the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 66–70.<\/p>\n<p>During the Six-Day War in June 1967, Sukenik’s son, Yigael Yadin of the Hebrew University, acquired a Qumran document called the Temple Scroll. That tightly rolled scroll measures 28 feet (8.5 meters) and is the longest scroll found so far in the Qumran area. A major portion of it is devoted to statutes of the kings and matters of defense. It also describes sacrificial feasts and rules of cleanliness. Almost half of the scroll gives detailed instructions for building a future temple, supposedly revealed by God to the scroll’s author.<\/p>\n<h5>Important Dead Sea Scroll Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<p>Among the hundreds of biblical manuscripts discovered in the 11 caves around the Dead Sea, there are some very significant ones—especially for textual studies. These are listed below. (The first number signifies the cave, Q indicates Qumran, the abbreviation for the biblical book follows, often followed by a superscipt letter for successive manuscripts containing the same book.)<\/p>\n<h6>1QIsa<span>a<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>This is the first Dead Sea Scroll to receive widespread attention. It is dated to c. 100 <span>BC<\/span>. The text, which includes most of Isaiah, is proto-Masoretic with some significant variants.<\/p>\n<h6>1QIsa<span>b<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>The text, which includes most of Isaiah, is proto-Masoretic. It is dated to a period from 25 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 50.<\/p>\n<h6>2QJer<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript is dated to a period from 25 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 50 and has portions of Jeremiah chapters 42–49. It has some readings that follow the Septuagint (LXX), while it follows the order of chapters found in proto-Masoretic texts. For the book of Jeremiah, the Septuagint and Masoretic Text are quite different: the Septuagint is one-eighth shorter and has a different arrangement of chapters.<\/p>\n<h6>4QPaleoExod<span>m<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, containing most of Exodus, is dated quite early: 200–175 <span>BC<\/span>. As such, it has provided scholars with some interesting insights into the early history of textual transmission of Exodus and the Pentateuch. The manuscript shows many similarities with the Samaritan Pentateuch.<\/p>\n<h6>4QNum<span>b<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated 30 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20, contains most of Numbers. The book of Numbers existed in three distinguishable textual traditions: the Masoretic Text, the Samaritan Pentateuch, and the Septuagint. This manuscript, 4QNum<span>b<\/span>, shows similarities with the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint, while having its own unique readings.<\/p>\n\n<h6>4QSam<span>a<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, containing about one tenth of 1 and 2 Samuel, is dated c. 50–25 <span>BC<\/span>. This manuscript, showing some similarities with the Septuagint, is believed to have several readings that are superior to the Masoretic Text.<\/p>\n<h6>4QJer<span>a<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, containing portions of Jeremiah 7–22, dates c. 200 <span>BC<\/span>. It generally concurs with the Masoretic Text.<\/p>\n<h6>4QJer<span>b<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated c. 150–125 <span>BC<\/span>, follows the arrangement of the Septuagint, as well as its brevity. The significance of this is that two different texts of Jeremiah were used in the pre-Christian era—one that was proto-Masoretic (as with 4QJer<span>a<\/span>) and one that was like the Septuagint.<\/p>\n<h6>11QPs<span>a<\/span><\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated c. <span>AD<\/span> 25–50, preserves many psalms. However, these are not in the traditional sequence found in the Hebrew Bible. Furthermore, the manuscript has several other psalms, some of which were known from other ancient versions and others that were unknown until they surfaced in this manuscript.<\/p>\n<h5>Scroll Discoveries at Wadi Murabba’at<\/h5>\n<p>In 1951 Bedouin discovered more manuscripts in caves in the Wadi Murabba’at, which extends southeast from Bethlehem toward the Dead Sea, about 11 miles (17.7 kilometers) south of Qumran. Four caves were excavated there in 1952 under Harding and de Vaux. They yielded biblical documents and important materials, such as letters and coins, from the time of the second Jewish revolt under Bar-Kochba in <span>AD<\/span> 132–135. Among the biblical manuscripts was a scroll containing a Hebrew text of the Minor Prophets, dating from the second century <span>AD<\/span>. This manuscript corresponds almost perfectly to the Masoretic Text, hinting that by the second century a standard consonantal text was already taking shape. Also found in Wadi Murabba’at were fragments of the Pentateuch (the five books of Moses) and Isaiah.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the Dead Sea Scrolls, ancient witnesses to the Hebrew OT that are actually written in the Hebrew language are almost nonexistent. Because of this, the Dead Sea Scrolls may easily be one of the greatest archaeological finds of all time. They take us 1,000 years deeper into the history of the Hebrew OT, giving us the ability to assess all the other ancient witnesses with greater understanding.<\/p>\n<p>The most frequently represented OT books among the Dead Sea Scrolls are Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy, Psalms, and Isaiah. The oldest text is a fragment of Exodus dating from about 250 <span>BC<\/span>. The Isaiah Scroll dates from about 100 <span>BC<\/span>. These ancient witnesses only confirm the accuracy of the Masoretic Text and the care with which the Jewish scribes handled the Scriptures. Except for a few instances where spelling and grammar differ between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic Text, the two are amazingly similar. The differences do not warrant any major changes in the substance of the OT. Yet these discoveries are helping biblical scholars gain a clearer understanding of the text at an earlier time in its history and development.<\/p>\n<p>Early conclusions about the antiquity of the first Dead Sea Scrolls were not accepted by everyone. Some scholars were convinced that the scrolls were of medieval origin. A series of questions relate to the dating problem. When were the texts at Qumran composed? When were they deposited in the caves? Most scholars believe the manuscripts were placed in the caves by members of the Qumran community when Roman legions were besieging Jewish strongholds. That was shortly before the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n\n<p>Careful study of the contents of a document sometimes reveals its authorship and the date when it was written. An example of using such internal evidence for dating a nonbiblical work is found in the Habakkuk Commentary. It gives hints about the people and events in the days of the commentary’s author, not in the days of the prophet Habakkuk. The commentator described the enemies of God’s people as the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Kittim<\/span><em>.<\/em> Originally that word denoted Cyprus but later came to be more generally the Greek islands and the coasts of the eastern Mediterranean. In Daniel 11:30 the term is used prophetically, and most scholars identify the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Kittim<\/span> with the Romans. Thus, the Habakkuk Commentary was probably written about the time of the Roman capture of Palestine under Pompey in 63 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n\n<p>Another important item to consider when dating a manuscript is its copy date. Although the vast majority of manuscripts are undated, it is often possible to determine when a manuscript was written by paleography, the study of ancient handwriting. That was the method initially employed by Trever when he compared the script of the Isaiah Scroll with the Nash Papyrus, thus dating it to the pre-Christian era. His conclusions were confirmed by the late William F. Albright, then the foremost American archaeologist. During the time of the Babylonian captivity, the square script became the normal style of writing in Hebrew (as well as in Aramaic, a cousin of Hebrew). The evidence of paleography clearly dates the majority of the Qumran scrolls in the period between 200 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 200.<\/p>\n<p>Archaeology provides another kind of external evidence. The pottery discovered at Qumran dates from the late Hellenistic and early Roman periods (200 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 100). Earthenware articles and ornaments point to the same period. Several hundred coins were found in jars dating from the Graeco-Roman period. A crack in one of the buildings is attributed to an earthquake that, according to Josephus (a Jewish historian who wrote during the first century <span>AD<\/span>), occurred in 31 <span>BC<\/span>. The excavations at Khirbet Qumran indicate that the general period of their occupation was from about 135 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 68, the year the Zealot revolt was crushed by Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, radiocarbon analysis has contributed to dating the finds. Radiocarbon analysis is a method of dating material from the amount of radioactive carbon remaining in it. The process is also known as carbon-14 dating. Applied to the linen cloth in which the scrolls were wrapped, the analysis gave a date of <span>AD<\/span> 33 plus or minus 200 years. A later test bracketed the date between 250 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 50. Although there may be questions concerning the relation of the linen wrappings to the date of the scrolls themselves, the carbon-14 test agrees with the conclusions of both paleography and archaeology. The general period, then, in which the Dead Sea Scrolls can be safely dated is between about 150 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 68.<\/p>\n<h5>The Nash Papyrus<\/h5>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the oldest Hebrew witness to the OT was the Nash Papyrus. This manuscript was acquired in Egypt by W. L. Nash in 1902 and was donated to the Cambridge University Library. This manuscript contains a damaged copy of the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:2-17), part of Deuteronomy 5:6-21, and also the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shema<\/span> (Dt 6:4ff.). This is clearly a collection of devotional and liturgical passages, and has been dated to the same period as the Dead Sea Scrolls, between 150 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 68.<\/p>\n<h5>The Cairo Geniza Fragments<\/h5>\n<p>Near the end of the 19th century, many fragments from the 6th to the 8th centuries were found in an old synagogue in Cairo, Egypt, which had been St Michael’s Church until <span>AD<\/span> 882. They were found there in a geniza, a storage room where worn or faulty manuscripts were hidden until they could be disposed of properly. This geniza had apparently been walled off and forgotten until its recent discovery. In this small room, as many as 200,000 fragments were preserved, including biblical texts in Hebrew and Aramaic. The fact that the biblical fragments date from the 5th century <span>AD<\/span> makes them invaluable for shedding light on the development of the Masoretic work prior to the standardization instituted by the great Masoretes of Tiberias.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificantOldTestamentVersions\">Significant Old Testament Versions<\/p>\n<h5>The Samaritan Pentateuch<\/h5>\n<p>Exactly when the Samaritan community separated from the larger Jewish community is a matter of dispute. But at some point during the postexilic period (c. 540–100 <span>BC<\/span>), a clear division between Samaritans and Jews was marked off. At this point, the Samaritans, who accepted only the Pentateuch as canonical, apparently canonized their own particular version of the Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>A copy of the Samaritan Pentateuch came to the attention of scholars in 1616. Initially, it caused a great deal of excitement, but most of the early assessments of its value to textual criticism were negative. It differed from the Masoretic Text in some 6,000 instances, and many judged this to be the result of sectarian differences between Samaritans and Jews. By some, it was simply viewed as a sectarian revision of the Masoretic Text.<\/p>\n<p>After further assessment, however, it became clear that the Samaritan Pentateuch represented a text of much earlier origin than the Masoretic Text. And although a few of the distinctions of the Samaritan Pentateuch were clearly the result of sectarian concerns, most of the differences were neutral in this respect. Many of them had more to do with popularizing the text, rather than altering its meaning in any way. The fact that the Samaritan Pentateuch had much in common with the Septuagint, some of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the NT, revealed that most of its differences with the Masoretic Text were not due to sectarian differences. More likely, they were due to the use of a different textual base, which was probably in wide use in the ancient Near East until well after the time of Christ. This realization, though not solving any real problems, did much to illustrate the complexity of the OT textual tradition that existed before the Masoretic standard was completed.<\/p>\n<h5>The Septuagint (LXX)<\/h5>\n\n<p>The Septuagint is the oldest Greek translation of the OT, its witness being significantly older than that of the Masoretic Text. According to tradition, the Septuagint Pentateuch was translated by a team of 70 scholars in Alexandria, Egypt. (Hence its common designation LXX, the Roman numerals for 70.) The Jewish community in Egypt spoke Greek, not Hebrew, so a Greek translation of the OT was sincerely needed by that community of Jews. The exact date of translation is not known, but evidence indicates that the Septuagint Pentateuch was completed in the third century <span>BC<\/span>. The rest of the OT was probably translated over a long period of time, as it clearly represents the work of many different scholars.<\/p>\n<p>The value of the Septuagint to textual criticism varies widely from book to book. It might be said that the Septuagint is not a single version but a collection of versions made by various authors, who differed greatly in their methods and their knowledge of Hebrew. The translations of the individual books are in no way uniform. Many books are translated almost literally, while others like Job and Daniel are quite dynamic. So the value of each book for textual criticism must be assessed on a book-by-book basis. The books translated literally are clearly more helpful in making comparisons with the Masoretic Text than the more dynamic ones.<\/p>\n<p>The content of some books is significantly different when comparing the Septuagint and the Masoretic Text. For example, the Septuagint’s Jeremiah is missing significant portions found in the Masoretic Text, and the order of the text is significantly different as well. What these differences actually mean is difficult to know with certainty. It has been conjectured that the Septuagint is simply a poor translation and is therefore missing portions of the original Hebrew. But these same differences could also indicate that editorial additions and changes worked their way into the Masoretic Text during its long history of development. It is also possible that there were a number of valid textual traditions at that time, one followed by the Septuagint, and another followed by the Masoretic Text. This illustrates some of the difficulties that arise while doing OT textual criticism.<\/p>\n<p>The Septuagint was the standard OT text used by the early Christian church. The expanding Gentile church needed a translation in the common language of the time—Greek. By the time of Christ, even among the Jews, a majority of the people spoke Aramaic and Greek, not Hebrew. The NT writers evidence their inclination to the Septuagint by using it when quoting the OT.<\/p>\n<h5>Other Greek Versions<\/h5>\n<p>Because of the broad acceptance and use of the Septuagint among Christians, the Jews renounced it in favor of a number of other Greek versions. Aquila, a proselyte and disciple of Rabbi Akiba, produced a new translation around <span>AD<\/span> 130. In the spirit of his teacher, Aquila wrote an extremely literal translation, often to the point of communicating poorly in Greek. This literal approach, however, gained this version wide acceptance among Jews. Only fragments of this version have survived, but its literal nature reveals much about its Hebrew textual base.<\/p>\n<p>Symmachus produced a new version around <span>AD<\/span> 170 designed not only for accuracy but also to communicate well in the Greek language. His version has survived only in a few <em>Hexapla<\/em> fragments. A third Greek version came from Theodotion, a Jewish proselyte from the end of the second century <span>AD<\/span>. His version was apparently a revision of an earlier Greek version, possibly the Septuagint. This version has survived only in a few early Christian quotations, though it was once widely used.<\/p>\n<p>The Christian theologian Origen (c. <span>AD<\/span> 185–255) arranged the OT with six parallel versions for comparison in his <em>Hexapla.<\/em> In his effort to find the best text of the Septuagint, Origen wrote out six parallel columns containing first the Hebrew, second the Hebrew transliterated into Greek characters, third the text of Aquila, fourth the text of Symmachus, fifth his own corrected Septuagint text, sixth the text of Theodotion. Jerome used this great Bible at Caesarea in his work on the Vulgate (after 382—see below). Almost four centuries after Origen’s death, a Mesopotamian bishop, Paul of Tella, also used the <em>Hexapla<\/em> in the library at Caesarea (616–17) to make a translation into Syriac of Origen’s fifth column, the corrected Septuagint. Then in 638 the Islamic hordes swept through Caesarea and the <em>Hexapla<\/em> disappeared. Other than a few fragments, only Bishop Paul’s Syriac translation of Origen’s fifth column remains.<\/p>\n<p>An eighth-century copy of Bishop Paul’s Syriac <em>Hexapla<\/em> Septuagint is extant in a Milan museum. Other famous uncial manuscripts of the Septuagint are the codices: Vaticanus, early fourth century, now in the Vatican Library; Sinaiticus, mid-fourth century; and Alexandrinus, probably from the fifth century—both of the latter are in London’s British Museum. These copies are intensely studied because they bear a Greek witness to Hebrew texts far earlier than the Masoretic or “received text.”<\/p>\n<h5>The Aramaic Targums<\/h5>\n<p>The Aramaic Targums were Aramaic translations of the Hebrew OT. Since the common language of the Jews during the postexilic period was Aramaic and not Hebrew, a need for Aramaic translations of the Hebrew Bible arose. Hebrew remained the language of scholarly religious circles, and translations for the common people were often spurned by the religious leadership. But over time, the reading of the Scriptures and commentaries in Aramaic became an accepted practice in the synagogues.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of these translations was to get the message across and to edify the people. Thus, the translations were extremely interpretive. The translators paraphrased, added explanatory glosses, and often boldly reinterpreted the text according to the theological biases of their time. They sought to relate the Bible text to contemporary life and political circumstances. Because of the dynamic approach evident in these translations, their use in textual criticism is limited, but they do add to the welter of evidence to be collected and collated in order to reconstruct the text of the OT.<\/p>\n<h5>The Syriac Version<\/h5>\n<p>Another version worthy of note is the Syriac version. This version was in common use in the Syriac (eastern Aramaic) church, which designated it the <em>Peshitta,<\/em> meaning “the simple or plain.” What they intended by this designation is difficult to discern. It may indicate that it was intended for popular consumption, or that it avoided adding explanatory glosses and other additions, or perhaps that it was not an annotated text, as was the annotated <em>Syro-Hexapla<\/em> then in use by the same community.<\/p>\n<p>The literary history of the Syriac version is not known, though it is clearly complex. Some have identified it as the recasting of an Aramaic Targum in Syriac, while others claim it has a more independent origin. Some connect it to the conversion of the leaders of Adiabene (east of the Tigris River) to the Jewish faith during the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Their need for an OT could have brought about the development of a version in their common tongue—Syriac. Still others connect it to Christian origins. Obvious later revisions to the <em>Peshitta<\/em> complicate matters even more. More study needs to be done to assess the nature of this version before it can lend much insight into the history of the Hebrew text.<\/p>\n<h5>The Latin Versions<\/h5>\n<p>Latin was a dominant language in western regions of the Roman Empire from well before the time of Christ. It was in the western regions of southern Gaul and North Africa that the first Latin translations of the Bible appeared. Around <span>AD<\/span> 160 Tertullian apparently used a Latin version of the Scriptures. Not long after this, the Old Latin text seems to have been in circulation, evidenced by Cyprian’s use of it before his death in <span>AD<\/span> 258. The Old Latin version was translated from the Septuagint. Due to its early date, it is valuable as a witness to the early Septuagint text, before later editors obscured the nature of the original. It also indirectly gives clues to the nature of the Hebrew text at the time of the Septuagint’s translation. Complete manuscripts of the Old Latin text have not survived. After the completion of Jerome’s Latin version, the Vulgate, the older text fell into disuse. Enough fragmentary manuscripts of this version do exist, however, to lend significant information to the early OT text.<\/p>\n<p>Around the third century <span>AD<\/span>, Latin began to replace Greek as the language of learning in the larger Roman world. A uniform, reliable text was badly needed for theological and liturgical uses. To fill this need, Pope Damasus I (<span>AD<\/span> 336–84) commissioned Jerome, an eminent scholar in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, to undertake the translation. Jerome began this work as a translation from the Greek Septuagint, considered inspired by many church authorities, including Augustine. But later, and at the risk of great criticism, he turned to the Hebrew text being used in Palestine at that time as the base text for his translation. During the years between <span>AD<\/span> 390 and 405 Jerome wrote his Latin translation of the Hebrew OT. Yet, despite Jerome’s return to the original Hebrew, he was heavily dependent on the various Greek versions as aids in translation. As a result the Vulgate reflects the other Greek and Latin translations as much as the underlying Hebrew text. The value of the Vulgate for textual criticism is its pre-Masoretic witness to the Hebrew Bible, though this was compromised to a great extent by the influence of already existing Greek translations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheOldTestament\">The Text of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The task of the textual critic can be divided into a number of general stages: (1) the collection and collation of existing manuscripts, translations, and quotations; (2) the development of theory and methodology that will enable the critic to use the gathered information to reconstruct the most accurate text of the biblical materials; (3) the reconstruction of the history of the transmission of the text in order to identify the various influences affecting the text; (4) the evaluation of specific variant readings in light of textual evidence, theology, and history.<\/p>\n<p>Both OT and NT textual critics undertake a similar task and face similar obstacles. They both seek to unearth a hypothetical “original” text with limited resources that are at varying degrees of deterioration. But the OT textual critic faces a more complex textual history than does his NT counterpart. The NT was written primarily in the first century <span>AD<\/span>, and complete NT manuscripts exist that were written only a few hundred years later. The OT, however, is made up of literature written over a 1,000-year period, the oldest parts dating to the 12th century <span>BC<\/span>, or possibly even earlier. To make matters even more difficult, until recently, the earliest known Hebrew manuscripts of the OT were medieval. This left scholars with little witness as to the OT’s textual development from ancient times to the Middle Ages, a period of over 2,000 years.<\/p>\n<p>Until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the 1940s and 1950s, secondary Aramaic, Greek, and Latin translations served as the earliest significant witnesses to the early Hebrew Scriptures. Since these are translations, and subject to sectarian and contextual alterations and interpolations, their value to the textual critic, though significant, is limited. The recent discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls and other early manuscripts, however, have provided primary witnesses to the Hebrew OT in earlier times. The scholarly assessment of these discoveries is, at present, far from complete, and the discipline of OT textual criticism anxiously awaits a more complete assessment of their significance. In a general sense, however, the Dead Sea Scrolls have affirmed the accuracy of the Masoretic Text that we use today.<\/p>\n<p>Reconstruction of the history of the transmission of the text is an important element in evaluating variant readings. Material from a wide variety of sources must be combined in order to arrive at even a tentative reconstruction of the text. A brief sketch of scholarly opinion follows.<\/p>\n<p>The early history of the OT text as reflected in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Septuagint, and the ancient Hebrew text shows a remarkable fluidity and diversity. Evidently the standardizing process did not begin at the earliest stages. For example, the materials from the Qumran community, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, do not reflect any frustration with varying texts within that community.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars have attempted to account for such diversity by theories of local texts. They theorize that various localities in the Near East (e.g., Babylon, Palestine, Egypt) had differing text types that are reflected in the various surviving Hebrew texts and versions. Other scholars account for the diversity by recognizing a precanonical fluidity. They feel that until the process of canonization was complete, accurate reproduction of the manuscripts was not viewed as very important. It should be noted, however, that the basic text that modern scholarship has identified as closest to the original was among the Dead Sea texts (for example, the large Isaiah Scroll).<\/p>\n<p>Destruction of the temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 provided an impetus for standardization of the consonantal text. The texts found at Wadi Murabba’at, copied during the first centuries <span>AD<\/span>, reflect the new stage. The scholars initially reporting on the discovery were disappointed to find in these texts so few variations from the standard Masoretic Text. To scholars, the very early texts from the Dead Sea Scroll discoveries had become the standard consonantal text to the exclusion of other variants. Scholars have now gone so far as to identify the only slightly later Wadi Murabba’at texts as a “proto-Masoretic” standard. This seems to indicate that the Hebrew consonantal text was already approaching a standard in Palestine by the first centuries <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Standardization as practiced by the Masoretes meant identifying one text as normative and copying carefully from that text. It also meant correcting existing texts by the normative text. The Hebrew text, of course, was written with consonants alone, not with consonants <em>and<\/em> vowels, as we write English.<\/p>\n<p>The next stage in the transmission of the OT text was standardization of punctuation and vowel patterns. That process, which began fairly early in the NT period, extended over a period of 1,000 years. A long series of Masoretes provided annotations known as <em>Masora,<\/em> which, in Hebrew, means “tradition.” Two different motivations are evident in their work. One was their concern for accurate reproduction of the consonantal text. For that purpose a collection of annotations (on irregular forms, abnormal patterns, the number of times a form or word was used, and other matters) was gathered and inserted in the margins or at the end of the text.<\/p>\n<p>A second concern of the Masoretes was to record and standardize the vocalization of the consonantal text for reading purposes. Up until this point, scribes had been prohibited against inserting vowels to make the vocalization of the text clear. Because of this, a proper reading of the text depended on the oral tradition passed down from generation to generation. The origins of vocalization reflect differences between Babylon and Palestine. The Tiberian Masoretes (scholars working in Tiberias in Palestine) provided the most complete and exact system of vocalization. The earliest dated manuscript from that tradition is a codex of the Prophets from the Karaite synagogue of Cairo dated <span>AD<\/span> 896. Today the standard Hebrew text of the OT, <em>Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia,<\/em> an updated version of Kittel’s <em>Biblia Hebraica,<\/em> is constructed on the basis of the Tiberian Masoretic tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Standardization of both the consonantal text and vocalization succeeded so well that the manuscripts that have survived display a remarkable agreement. Most of the variants, being minor and attributable to scribal error, do not affect interpretation.<\/p>\n<h5>Methodology of Old Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>The search for an adequate methodology to handle the many variant readings found in manuscripts is inseparably intertwined with our understanding of the history of transmission. The basic issue in textual criticism is the method used to decide the relative value of those variant readings. Many factors must be evaluated in order to arrive at a valid decision.<\/p>\n<p>Modern science has provided a number of aids for deciphering a manuscript. Scientific dating procedures help to determine the age of the writing material. Chemical techniques help clarify writing that has deteriorated. Ultraviolet light enables a scholar to see traces of ink (carbon) in a manuscript even after the surface writing has been effaced.<\/p>\n<p>Each manuscript must be studied as a whole, for each has a “personality.” It is important to identify the characteristic errors, characteristic carelessness or carefulness, and other peculiarities of the scribe(s) who copied the material. Then the manuscript must be compared with other manuscripts to identify the “family” tradition with which it agrees. Preservation of common errors or insertions in the text is a clue to relationships. All possible details of date, place of origin, and authorship must be ascertained.<\/p>\n<p>Scribal errors fall into several distinct categories. The first large category is that of <em>unintentional errors:<\/em> (1) Confusion of similar consonants and the transposition of two consonants are frequent errors. (2) Corruptions also resulted from an incorrect division of words (many early manuscripts omitted spaces between words in order to save space). (3) Confusion of sounds occurred particularly when one scribe read to a group of scribes making multiple copies. (4) In the OT, the method of vocalization (addition of vowels to the consonantal text) created some errors. (5) Omissions of a letter, word, or phrase created new readings. (6) Repetition of a letter, word, or even a whole phrase was also common. (7) Omission (called haplography) or repetition (called dittography) could be caused by the eye of a scribe slipping from one word to a similar word or ending. (8) Omissions by <em>homoioteleuton<\/em> (Greek meaning “similar endings”) were also quite common. This occurred when two words that were identical, similar, or had identical endings were found close to each other, and the eye of the copyist moved from the first to the second, omitting the words between them. (9) In the OT, errors were at times caused by the use of consonants as vowel letters in some ancient texts. Copyists unaware of this usage of vowel letters would copy them in as aberrant consonants. Normally unintentional errors are fairly easy to identify because they create nonsense readings.<\/p>\n<p><em>Intentional errors<\/em> are much more difficult to identify and evaluate. Harmonizations from similar materials occurred with regularity. Difficult readings were subject to “improvement” by a thinking scribe. Objectionable expressions were sometimes eliminated or smoothed out. Occasionally synonyms were employed. Conflation (resolving a discrepancy between two variant readings by including both of them) often appears.<\/p>\n<p>Awareness of these common problems is the first step in detecting and eliminating the more obvious errors and identifying and eliminating the peculiarities of a particular scribe. Then more subtle criteria for identifying the reading most likely to be the original must be employed. Procedures for applying such criteria are similar in both OT and NT work.<\/p>\n<h5>General Methodological Principles<\/h5>\n<p>Through the work of textual critics in the last several centuries, certain basic principles have evolved. The primary principles for the OT can be briefly summarized.<\/p>\n<p>1. The basic text for primary consideration is the Masoretic Text because of the careful standardization it represents. That text is compared with the testimony of the ancient versions. The Septuagint, by reason of age and basic faithfulness to the Hebrew text, carries significant weight in all decisions. The Targums (Aramaic translations) also reflect the Hebrew base but exhibit a tendency to expansion and paraphrase. The Syriac (<em>Peshitta<\/em>), Vulgate (Latin), Old Latin, and Coptic versions add indirect evidence, although translations are not always clear witnesses in technical details. Use of such versions does enable scholars to use comparative philology in textual decisions and thus expose early errors for which the original reading probably has not survived.<\/p>\n<li>2. The reading that best explains the origin of other variants is preferable. Information from reconstruction of the history of transmission often provides additional insight. Knowledge of typical scribal errors enables the critic to make an educated decision on the sequence of variants.<\/li>\n<li>3. The shorter reading is preferable. The scribes frequently added material in order to solve style or syntax problems and seldom abridged or condensed material.<\/li>\n<li>4. The more difficult reading is more likely to be the original one. This principle is closely related to the third. Scribes did not intentionally create more complex readings. Unintentional errors are usually easy to identify. Thus the easier reading is normally suspect as a scribal alteration.<\/li>\n<li>5. Readings that are not harmonized or assimilated to similar passages are preferable. Copyists had a tendency to correct material on the basis of similar material elsewhere (sometimes even unconsciously).<\/li>\n<li>6. When all else fails, the textual critic must resort to conjectural emendation. To make an “educated guess” requires intimate acquaintance with the Hebrew language, familiarity with the author’s style, and an understanding of culture, customs, and theology that might color the passage. Use of conjecture must be limited to those passages in which the original reading has definitely not been transmitted to us.<\/li>\n<h5>Conclusion<\/h5>\n<p>It should be remembered that textual criticism operates only when two or more readings are possible for a specific word or phrase. For most of the biblical text, a single reading has been transmitted. Elimination of scribal errors and intentional changes leaves only a small percentage of the text about which any questions occur.<\/p>\n<p>The field of textual criticism is complex, requiring the gathering and skillful use of a wide variety of information. Because it deals with the authoritative source of revelation for all Christians, textual argumentation has often been accompanied by emotion. Yet in spite of controversy, great progress has been made, particularly in the last century. Refinement of methodology has greatly aided our understanding of the accumulated materials. Additional aid has come from accumulations of information in related fields of study such as church history, biblical theology, and the history of Christian thought.<\/p>\n<p>Collection and organization of all variant readings have enabled modern textual critics to give strong assurance that the Word of God has been transmitted in accurate and dependable form. Although variant readings have become obvious through the publication of so many manuscripts, inadequate, inferior, and secondary readings have been largely eliminated. In relatively few places is conjectural emendation necessary. In matters pertaining to the Christian’s salvation, clear and unmistakable transmission provides authoritative answers. Christians are thus in debt to the textual critics who have worked, and are working, to provide a dependable biblical text.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (Old Testament) Copies of the OT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. The ancient manuscripts of the OT are the basic working material used to seek out the original text of the Bible with as great a degree of accuracy as possible. This process is called textual criticism, sometimes designated “lower criticism” to distinguish it from “higher criticism,” which is analysis of the date, unity, and authorship of the biblical writings. P...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (Old Testament) Copies of the OT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. The ancient manuscripts of the OT are the basic working material used to seek out the original text of the Bible with as great a degree of accuracy as possible. This process is called textual criticism, sometimes designated “lower criticism” to distinguish it from “higher criticism,” which is analysis of the date, unity, and authorship of the biblical writings. P...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7274,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandments, the Ten","title_en":"Commandments, the Ten","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7871,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covenant","title_en":"Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>COVENANT<\/h3>\n<p>Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the OT is developed from Noah to Abraham and reaches its first climax in the covenant formed between God and Israel at Mt Sinai. After King David’s time, the history of the covenant becomes a less prominent theme.<\/p>\n<p>At a low point in covenant history the Bible introduces the prophet Jeremiah’s prophecy of a “new covenant” in Israel’s future. Christians believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy eventually found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is not accidental that the two volumes of the Christian Bible have been called the Old Covenant and New Covenant (the word commonly translated “testament” means “covenant”).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<p>• The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>• The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningofCovenant\">The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The essence of covenant is to be found in a particular kind of relationship between persons. Mutual obligations characterize that kind of relationship. Thus a covenant relationship is not merely a mutual acquaintance but a commitment to responsibility and action. A key word in Scripture to describe that commitment is “faithfulness,” acted out in a context of abiding friendship.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the word “covenant” was used in an ordinary human sense as well as in a theological sense. An understanding of human covenants provides a starting point for understanding the covenant between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HumanCovenants\">Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>A variety of human relationships, from profoundly personal to distantly political, may be described as covenantal. The deep brotherly love that David and Jonathan shared led to a formal covenant between them (1 Sm 18:3). Their covenant of friendship was more than a token of esteem; it bound them to demonstrate mutual loyalty and loving-kindness in certain tangible ways. Jonathan’s covenant faithfulness was typified on an occasion when David was out of favor with the king; Jonathan braved his father’s wrath to speak favorably for his friend. Subsequently, he warned David secretly to flee into hiding (1 Sm 19–20).<\/p>\n<p>To appreciate the many OT laws on marriage and divorce, one must understand that marriage itself was a covenant relationship (Mal 2:14). The solemn promises exchanged by a man and woman became their covenant obligations. Faithfulness to those promises brought marital blessing (cf. Ps 128; Prv 18:22); violation brought a curse.<\/p>\n<p>An individual could, at least figuratively, make a covenant or vow with himself or herself (something like a New Year’s resolution). Job, arguing his integrity before God, referred to a covenant he had made with his eyes to keep him from looking at women licentiously (Jb 31:1).<\/p>\n<p>Covenants could also have a national or international character. The elders of Israel made a national covenant with King David in Hebron (2 Sm 5:3). Probably it contained explicit promises both from the elders on behalf of the people to submit themselves to the king’s authority and from David to rule the nation justly and according to the law of God (Dt 17:15-20). The covenant relationship described mutual obligations between a senior partner (the king) and junior partners (the Israelites). In international relationships OT covenants were similar to modern treaties or alliances. King Solomon entered into such a covenant with Hiram, king of Tyre; that covenant, like many modern international treaties, was a trade agreement between the two nations (1 Kgs 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is thus an interpersonal framework of trust, responsibilities, and benefits, with broad application to almost every human relationship from personal friendship to international trade agreements. In Scripture covenant is also the most comprehensive concept covering an individual’s relationship to God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Divine-HumanCovenants\">Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>The same basic characteristics of a strictly human covenant are present in a divine covenant: (1) a relationship between two parties (God and a human being or nation), and (2) mutual obligations between the covenant partners. To the OT believer, religion meant covenant. OT religion was faithfulness to the covenant relationship between God and his chosen people; religious responsibilities for both the faith and practice of Israel were covenant responsibilities.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of a divine-human covenant in the OT was not static. Although the fundamental character of covenant remains the same throughout the Bible, the specific nature and form of the covenant changed and developed in the course of ancient Israel’s history. A brief survey of covenant history will further clarify its dimensions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BeginningsoftheCovenantTradition\">Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<h5>Adam<\/h5>\n<p>Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden. God was their Creator; they were his creatures. The meaning of their lives was to be found in relationship with each other and with God, the giver of the Garden. The fall, however, brought a disruption of the divine relationship, and they were expelled from the Garden.<\/p>\n<p>The fall substantially influenced the nature of subsequent religious covenants. The separation of humankind from God clarifies the nature of the human predicament. Created for a relationship with the Creator, sinning humans are excluded from that relationship and cannot, on their own accord, reestablish it. From that circumstance emerges a distinctive feature of divine-human covenants, namely, that God alone can initiate the relationship of covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>Noah<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit mention of covenant in Scripture refers to the initiative taken by God to bind himself again to human beings in a covenant, despite human faithlessness. When God warned Noah to build an ark in order to escape the impending Flood, he also promised to establish a covenant with him (Gn 6:18). The corruption and violence of the human race had provoked God’s anger, but his grace was shown in his dealings with Noah. The promised covenant provided that God would maintain a relationship with one family, even though other divine-human relationships were being formally severed. Significantly, God’s covenant promise to Noah came in a context of demand: God ordered Noah to build an ark (v 14). Noah’s receipt of the covenant blessing depended on his obedience to a divine command.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant was elaborated only after the Flood, when Noah had made an offering to God (Gn 8:20-22). The covenant with Noah was in fact a universal covenant with humankind and all living creatures (9:8-10). God promised never to send such a flood again as judgment on the world. The sign of that covenant was the rainbow.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant with Noah affords some perspective for understanding the “covenant God.” Although human beings may deserve destruction because of their wickedness, God withholds that destruction. The covenant of Noah did not establish an intimate relationship between God and each living being; nevertheless, it left open the possibility of a more intimate covenant. Human beings, in spite of their evil, are allowed for a time to live in God’s world; during those years, they may seek a deeper relationship with that world’s Creator.<\/p>\n<h5>Abraham<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit reference to God’s covenant with Abraham is in Genesis 15. When the Lord called the 75-year-old Abram (as he was first called) to leave his home city of Ur and set out on a journey, a relationship already existed between God and Abram. In that relationship, which enabled God to command Abram’s obedience, God made certain promises to him: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gn 12:2, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Formal establishment of the covenant with Abram is described in Genesis 15 as a profound religious experience. The initiative lay entirely with God, who approached Abram in a vision and spoke with him. Abram raised a fundamental objection: how could he experience the blessing of God if it was to come to him through a son he did not have? His wife Sarai was past the childbearing age, and he himself was “as good as dead” (Rom 4:19). God assured the old man that he would have a son through whom his descendants would eventually be as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abram’s belief at that point introduced the theme of righteousness central to the covenant concept: Abram “believed the <span>Lord<\/span>, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). At the end of that day, Abram knew that his own future and the future of his descendants were firmly in the hands of the covenant God. “On that day the <span>Lord<\/span> made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I give this land’ ” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The covenant is more fully expressed in Genesis 17, which probably records a renewal of God’s covenant with Abram. The initiative once again lay with God (Gn 17:1). God addressed the 99-year-old Abram in words that made clear that the covenant was not a relationship between equal partners. God was the Almighty; Abram was a human being to whom an extraordinary privilege had been granted.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the details of the covenant in Genesis 17 show that both partners assumed responsibilities. God committed himself voluntarily to Abram and his descendants while requiring certain commitments from Abram. The blessing Abram would receive as a covenant partner became clear from the new name God gave him. “I am changing your name. It will no longer be Abram; now you will be known as Abraham, for you will be the father of many nations” (Gn 17:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). God would give to Abraham, through his descendants, the land of Canaan as an everlasting gift and would be the personal God of Abraham and his family in perpetuity (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<p>God’s giving required a response of obedience from Abraham: “Live a blameless life” (Gn 17:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Those simple words indicate the essence of covenant relationship: to relate to God is to live in his presence; since God is holy, one who knows him is expected to live a life of integrity and blamelessness.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant also had a more formal aspect. Abraham and the male members of his household were to undergo the rite of circumcision as a symbol of covenant commitment. Abraham was an old man when he was circumcised (Gn 17:24), though male children born into the covenant family were to be circumcised when they were eight days old (v 12). Circumcision was not in itself a ritual peculiar to the Hebrews; it was practiced in most societies in the ancient Near East (the Philistines were one exception). The distinctiveness lay in what the act symbolized: among other things, a continuing and faithful relationship with the living God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Abraham was characterized by both present and future realities. The covenant established a continuing relationship between Abraham and his Creator. Yet its thrust pointed to future blessing—in the children yet to be born, the “chosen people,” and in the land that eventually his descendants would call their own.<\/p>\n<p>Another dimension of the covenant lay still further in the future: “All the families of the earth will be blessed through you” (Gn 12:3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Early in the OT, the idea of election (God’s unconditional preference; cf. 2 Thes 2:13) is present. God chose to enter into a covenant relationship with a particular man and his particular descendants. Yet God always elects a person to serve: Adam, to cultivate the Garden; Noah, to build an ark; Abraham, to leave his home for another land and to live blamelessly before God (cf. Eph 2:8-10). Further, the “particularity” of Abraham’s election contained within it a universality: through his descendants the blessing of God would be offered to all.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, the future aspects of Abraham’s covenant reflect two stages. From Abraham’s perspective, in the relatively near future his descendants would possess a land given them by God. But in the more distant future was the prospect of a universal blessing, the culmination of God’s work in the world. The initial fulfillment of that distant future is perceived in the NT, but the more immediate fulfillment of God’s promise was the Sinai covenant at the time of Moses.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSinaiCovenant\">The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The covenant established between God and Israel at Mt Sinai is the focal point of the covenant tradition in the OT. It was anticipated in the covenant of Abraham and lay behind the covenant of David and the proclamation of the prophets. It was central to OT religion, laying down the foundations of Judaism that continue into the modern world. The Sinai covenant was the formal institution of a relationship between God and his chosen people, Israel.<\/p>\n<p>In order to appreciate the impact of the Sinai covenant, one must understand its historical context. It was preceded by the exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. The exodus was an extraordinary act of liberation in which God intervened in the normal course of history to free his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus is interpreted in the OT as a divine act comparable to Creation, the act through which God “created” the nation of Israel. Examination of the two versions of the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15) shows that the exodus from Egypt directly parallels the creation of the world as a basis for Sabbath observance. Although Israel was created in the exodus, the nation had neither a constitution nor land. The covenant provided the nascent state of Israel with a constitution, making it a theocratic state (a state ruled by God).<\/p>\n<p>The basic account of the Sinai covenant is contained in Exodus 19 and 20. The initiative came from God, who gave instructions through Moses to prepare for the covenant; God spoke the words that contained the covenant offer. There was no doubt that the God of Israel was the senior partner in the relationship made formal at Sinai. The God who had revealed himself through his acts in the exodus then revealed himself in words. Those two aspects—the God who acts and speaks—are central to OT theology. And although the covenant contained law, it was preceded by the exodus, an act of divine grace.<\/p>\n<p>God’s offer of covenant carried with it a divine promise: “You will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). The promise was one of extraordinary privilege; an entire nation was called upon to represent all other nations before the God of the universe. But the priestly office, though it carried privilege, was also a demanding office. A priest had to be pure and had to know the God whose presence he was required to enter. Thus Israel, the priestly nation, received a law that would provide direction in living, in loving God, and in serving all people. The law given with the covenant expressed the requirements for God’s covenant people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Covenant Law<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant law had two principal parts. First, the Ten Commandments expressed God’s requirements of Israel in a concise form (Ex 20:2-17). The commandments specified the covenant people’s relationship both to God and to other human beings. Although the tendency in the present day is to view the Ten Commandments as a system of ethics or morality, they had a different role in ancient Israel. The covenant law was the foundation or constitution of a new nation, a special “nation of priests.” The head of the nation-state was God. Hence, in ancient Israel the status of the Ten Commandments was approximately that of the code of criminal law in a modern nation-state. To break one of those laws was to commit a crime against God, the head of the state. Yet the laws had a positive purpose. They set down a way of life that would result in a full and rich communion with God and community with others.<\/p>\n<p>The second part of the covenant law was a detailed law code covering the activities of everyday life. Examples of such laws are found in Exodus 21–23. These laws were compiled and recorded in the “Book of the Covenant” (Ex 24:7). Although many laws were contained in this book, it was impossible to codify every aspect of human behavior. The diversity of the examples given indicates that for the covenant member no area of human life was beyond the influence of the covenant. Persons who entered into a relationship with God entered into a relationship that impinged on every possible aspect of their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Renewal<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant at Sinai was made with a particular group of people under the leadership of Moses but was binding on future generations. Consequently, the covenant was renewed from time to time. Covenant renewals are recorded in the time of Joshua (Jos 8:30-35; 24:1-28) and, much later, during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>The most important passage in the Bible for understanding covenant renewal and the nature of covenant is the book of Deuteronomy. The entire book describes a particular covenant renewal ceremony that occurred at a critical juncture in Israel’s early history. The Sinai covenant was renewed just before Moses’ death, before the transition of leadership to Joshua, and before a major military campaign to possess the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant since the time of Abraham had contained a promise of land. Immediately before they entered that land (c. 1250 <span>BC<\/span>), the covenant vows were renewed with a new generation of Israelites, most of whom had not stood at the foot of Mt Sinai some 40 years earlier. Although covenant renewal is the central theme of Deuteronomy, the writer focused primarily on Moses’ sermon rather than on a detailed account of the renewal ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ceremony were simply a repetition of what happened at the original ratification of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were repeated (Dt 5:6-21), and the laws of the Book of the Covenant were expounded in greater detail (Dt 12–26). Two points emerging in Deuteronomy are particularly significant for an understanding of covenant: a clear statement of covenant love and a detailed statement of the blessings and curses that accompanied the making and renewing of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCovenantwithDavid\">The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>The covenant tradition underwent modification during the time of King David (c. 1000 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sinai covenant had been established between God and Israel, with Moses acting as mediator. In David’s time an additional element was added: God entered into a covenant with David as king. That royal covenant was intimated to David through the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:8-16), indicating once again the divine initiative. It was to be an everlasting covenant with David’s royal lineage (23:5).<\/p>\n\n<p>Christians generally interpret the covenant with David as a messianic covenant. For several centuries the dynasty established by David ruled a united Israel, then ruled the remaining southern kingdom of Judah. But in 586 <span>BC<\/span> Judah was conquered by the Babylonians. At that point a descendant of David was no longer ruling an independent kingdom of God’s chosen people. The everlasting nature of the covenant with David was brought out, however, not in the pages of ancient history but in the expectation of a Messiah who would be born of David’s descendants. Matthew and Luke both pointed to Jesus’ Davidic descent (Mt 1:1; Lk 3:31). The NT thus extends the covenant acts of God into the new age in the person of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNewCovenantPredictedintheOldTestament\">The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although David’s covenant with God was eternal, in a sense the covenant established with Israel on Mt Sinai was temporal. The Sinai covenant included conditional clauses, stated in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy. Israel’s disobedience of the covenant law would at worst bring exile from the Promised Land, a central covenant theme from Abraham to Moses and beyond.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew prophets often perceived the danger of an end to the covenant as a result of Israel’s sins. Some of the prophets, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, also perceived a deeper truth; namely, that the covenant was rooted in divine love and that therefore even the curse of God could not be final.<\/p>\n<p>Hosea dramatically expressed that truth through the “living parable” of his marriage (Hos 1–3). He married Gomer at God’s command, but later, as a result of her unfaithfulness, the marital covenant was dissolved by divorce. Although Gomer’s adulterous acts compelled Hosea to divorce her, he did not cease to love her. God later commanded Hosea to go back to Gomer (Hos 3:1). Despite her unfaithfulness, the prophet was to take her again into the covenant relationship of marriage. That acted-out parable depicted God’s actions with Israel. Israel’s sin would inevitably culminate in a divorce from God, but Hosea perceived a new marriage. In the new covenant between God and Israel, Israel would be graciously accepted back into a relationship with God (2:14-18).<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant is given powerful expression in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In his lifetime Jeremiah saw the kingdom of Judah defeated in war. The nation lost its independence and became a vassal of the Babylonian Empire. In an external sense, that defeat in 586 <span>BC<\/span> marked the end of the Sinai covenant. Israel could no longer call the Promised Land its own. Yet Jeremiah perceived a truth beyond the contemporary political realities. God’s work in the world, like his love for the world, was not over.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant that God would bring into effect: “The days are coming, says the <span>Lord<\/span>, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The new covenant would be marked by an act of God within human hearts, a radical spiritual transformation (Jer 31:34). At the Last Supper Jesus declared to his disciples that “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). To the writer of Hebrews, the new covenant was central to a full understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ (Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is a concept central to the message and the history of the OT. The covenant theme continues into the NT as a way of interpreting the Christian gospel. Meaning in human life is to be found in a covenant relationship with the living God. Yet sinful human beings cannot work their way into such a relationship; God alone can initiate it. According to the NT, God’s act in giving his son, Jesus, to die opened up the covenant relationship to all human beings. The forgiveness made available by Jesus’ “blood of the new covenant” makes it possible for any individual to enter into a covenant relationship with God. Entry into such a relationship, today as in Abraham’s time, hinges upon faith (Gal 3:6-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Alliance; Covenant, The New; Law, Biblical Concept of; Oath; Vows.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVENANT<\/h3>\n<p>Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the OT is developed from Noah to Abraham and reaches its first climax in the covenant formed between God and Israel at Mt Sinai. After King David’s time, the history of the covenant becomes a less prominent theme.<\/p>\n<p>At a low point in covenant history the Bible introduces the prophet Jeremiah’s prophecy of a “new covenant” in Israel’s future. Christians believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy eventually found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is not accidental that the two volumes of the Christian Bible have been called the Old Covenant and New Covenant (the word commonly translated “testament” means “covenant”).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<p>• The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>• The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningofCovenant\">The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The essence of covenant is to be found in a particular kind of relationship between persons. Mutual obligations characterize that kind of relationship. Thus a covenant relationship is not merely a mutual acquaintance but a commitment to responsibility and action. A key word in Scripture to describe that commitment is “faithfulness,” acted out in a context of abiding friendship.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the word “covenant” was used in an ordinary human sense as well as in a theological sense. An understanding of human covenants provides a starting point for understanding the covenant between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HumanCovenants\">Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>A variety of human relationships, from profoundly personal to distantly political, may be described as covenantal. The deep brotherly love that David and Jonathan shared led to a formal covenant between them (1 Sm 18:3). Their covenant of friendship was more than a token of esteem; it bound them to demonstrate mutual loyalty and loving-kindness in certain tangible ways. Jonathan’s covenant faithfulness was typified on an occasion when David was out of favor with the king; Jonathan braved his father’s wrath to speak favorably for his friend. Subsequently, he warned David secretly to flee into hiding (1 Sm 19–20).<\/p>\n<p>To appreciate the many OT laws on marriage and divorce, one must understand that marriage itself was a covenant relationship (Mal 2:14). The solemn promises exchanged by a man and woman became their covenant obligations. Faithfulness to those promises brought marital blessing (cf. Ps 128; Prv 18:22); violation brought a curse.<\/p>\n<p>An individual could, at least figuratively, make a covenant or vow with himself or herself (something like a New Year’s resolution). Job, arguing his integrity before God, referred to a covenant he had made with his eyes to keep him from looking at women licentiously (Jb 31:1).<\/p>\n<p>Covenants could also have a national or international character. The elders of Israel made a national covenant with King David in Hebron (2 Sm 5:3). Probably it contained explicit promises both from the elders on behalf of the people to submit themselves to the king’s authority and from David to rule the nation justly and according to the law of God (Dt 17:15-20). The covenant relationship described mutual obligations between a senior partner (the king) and junior partners (the Israelites). In international relationships OT covenants were similar to modern treaties or alliances. King Solomon entered into such a covenant with Hiram, king of Tyre; that covenant, like many modern international treaties, was a trade agreement between the two nations (1 Kgs 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is thus an interpersonal framework of trust, responsibilities, and benefits, with broad application to almost every human relationship from personal friendship to international trade agreements. In Scripture covenant is also the most comprehensive concept covering an individual’s relationship to God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Divine-HumanCovenants\">Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>The same basic characteristics of a strictly human covenant are present in a divine covenant: (1) a relationship between two parties (God and a human being or nation), and (2) mutual obligations between the covenant partners. To the OT believer, religion meant covenant. OT religion was faithfulness to the covenant relationship between God and his chosen people; religious responsibilities for both the faith and practice of Israel were covenant responsibilities.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of a divine-human covenant in the OT was not static. Although the fundamental character of covenant remains the same throughout the Bible, the specific nature and form of the covenant changed and developed in the course of ancient Israel’s history. A brief survey of covenant history will further clarify its dimensions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BeginningsoftheCovenantTradition\">Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<h5>Adam<\/h5>\n<p>Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden. God was their Creator; they were his creatures. The meaning of their lives was to be found in relationship with each other and with God, the giver of the Garden. The fall, however, brought a disruption of the divine relationship, and they were expelled from the Garden.<\/p>\n<p>The fall substantially influenced the nature of subsequent religious covenants. The separation of humankind from God clarifies the nature of the human predicament. Created for a relationship with the Creator, sinning humans are excluded from that relationship and cannot, on their own accord, reestablish it. From that circumstance emerges a distinctive feature of divine-human covenants, namely, that God alone can initiate the relationship of covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>Noah<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit mention of covenant in Scripture refers to the initiative taken by God to bind himself again to human beings in a covenant, despite human faithlessness. When God warned Noah to build an ark in order to escape the impending Flood, he also promised to establish a covenant with him (Gn 6:18). The corruption and violence of the human race had provoked God’s anger, but his grace was shown in his dealings with Noah. The promised covenant provided that God would maintain a relationship with one family, even though other divine-human relationships were being formally severed. Significantly, God’s covenant promise to Noah came in a context of demand: God ordered Noah to build an ark (v 14). Noah’s receipt of the covenant blessing depended on his obedience to a divine command.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant was elaborated only after the Flood, when Noah had made an offering to God (Gn 8:20-22). The covenant with Noah was in fact a universal covenant with humankind and all living creatures (9:8-10). God promised never to send such a flood again as judgment on the world. The sign of that covenant was the rainbow.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant with Noah affords some perspective for understanding the “covenant God.” Although human beings may deserve destruction because of their wickedness, God withholds that destruction. The covenant of Noah did not establish an intimate relationship between God and each living being; nevertheless, it left open the possibility of a more intimate covenant. Human beings, in spite of their evil, are allowed for a time to live in God’s world; during those years, they may seek a deeper relationship with that world’s Creator.<\/p>\n<h5>Abraham<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit reference to God’s covenant with Abraham is in Genesis 15. When the Lord called the 75-year-old Abram (as he was first called) to leave his home city of Ur and set out on a journey, a relationship already existed between God and Abram. In that relationship, which enabled God to command Abram’s obedience, God made certain promises to him: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gn 12:2, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Formal establishment of the covenant with Abram is described in Genesis 15 as a profound religious experience. The initiative lay entirely with God, who approached Abram in a vision and spoke with him. Abram raised a fundamental objection: how could he experience the blessing of God if it was to come to him through a son he did not have? His wife Sarai was past the childbearing age, and he himself was “as good as dead” (Rom 4:19). God assured the old man that he would have a son through whom his descendants would eventually be as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abram’s belief at that point introduced the theme of righteousness central to the covenant concept: Abram “believed the <span>Lord<\/span>, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). At the end of that day, Abram knew that his own future and the future of his descendants were firmly in the hands of the covenant God. “On that day the <span>Lord<\/span> made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I give this land’ ” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The covenant is more fully expressed in Genesis 17, which probably records a renewal of God’s covenant with Abram. The initiative once again lay with God (Gn 17:1). God addressed the 99-year-old Abram in words that made clear that the covenant was not a relationship between equal partners. God was the Almighty; Abram was a human being to whom an extraordinary privilege had been granted.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the details of the covenant in Genesis 17 show that both partners assumed responsibilities. God committed himself voluntarily to Abram and his descendants while requiring certain commitments from Abram. The blessing Abram would receive as a covenant partner became clear from the new name God gave him. “I am changing your name. It will no longer be Abram; now you will be known as Abraham, for you will be the father of many nations” (Gn 17:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). God would give to Abraham, through his descendants, the land of Canaan as an everlasting gift and would be the personal God of Abraham and his family in perpetuity (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<p>God’s giving required a response of obedience from Abraham: “Live a blameless life” (Gn 17:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Those simple words indicate the essence of covenant relationship: to relate to God is to live in his presence; since God is holy, one who knows him is expected to live a life of integrity and blamelessness.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant also had a more formal aspect. Abraham and the male members of his household were to undergo the rite of circumcision as a symbol of covenant commitment. Abraham was an old man when he was circumcised (Gn 17:24), though male children born into the covenant family were to be circumcised when they were eight days old (v 12). Circumcision was not in itself a ritual peculiar to the Hebrews; it was practiced in most societies in the ancient Near East (the Philistines were one exception). The distinctiveness lay in what the act symbolized: among other things, a continuing and faithful relationship with the living God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Abraham was characterized by both present and future realities. The covenant established a continuing relationship between Abraham and his Creator. Yet its thrust pointed to future blessing—in the children yet to be born, the “chosen people,” and in the land that eventually his descendants would call their own.<\/p>\n<p>Another dimension of the covenant lay still further in the future: “All the families of the earth will be blessed through you” (Gn 12:3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Early in the OT, the idea of election (God’s unconditional preference; cf. 2 Thes 2:13) is present. God chose to enter into a covenant relationship with a particular man and his particular descendants. Yet God always elects a person to serve: Adam, to cultivate the Garden; Noah, to build an ark; Abraham, to leave his home for another land and to live blamelessly before God (cf. Eph 2:8-10). Further, the “particularity” of Abraham’s election contained within it a universality: through his descendants the blessing of God would be offered to all.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, the future aspects of Abraham’s covenant reflect two stages. From Abraham’s perspective, in the relatively near future his descendants would possess a land given them by God. But in the more distant future was the prospect of a universal blessing, the culmination of God’s work in the world. The initial fulfillment of that distant future is perceived in the NT, but the more immediate fulfillment of God’s promise was the Sinai covenant at the time of Moses.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSinaiCovenant\">The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The covenant established between God and Israel at Mt Sinai is the focal point of the covenant tradition in the OT. It was anticipated in the covenant of Abraham and lay behind the covenant of David and the proclamation of the prophets. It was central to OT religion, laying down the foundations of Judaism that continue into the modern world. The Sinai covenant was the formal institution of a relationship between God and his chosen people, Israel.<\/p>\n<p>In order to appreciate the impact of the Sinai covenant, one must understand its historical context. It was preceded by the exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. The exodus was an extraordinary act of liberation in which God intervened in the normal course of history to free his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus is interpreted in the OT as a divine act comparable to Creation, the act through which God “created” the nation of Israel. Examination of the two versions of the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15) shows that the exodus from Egypt directly parallels the creation of the world as a basis for Sabbath observance. Although Israel was created in the exodus, the nation had neither a constitution nor land. The covenant provided the nascent state of Israel with a constitution, making it a theocratic state (a state ruled by God).<\/p>\n<p>The basic account of the Sinai covenant is contained in Exodus 19 and 20. The initiative came from God, who gave instructions through Moses to prepare for the covenant; God spoke the words that contained the covenant offer. There was no doubt that the God of Israel was the senior partner in the relationship made formal at Sinai. The God who had revealed himself through his acts in the exodus then revealed himself in words. Those two aspects—the God who acts and speaks—are central to OT theology. And although the covenant contained law, it was preceded by the exodus, an act of divine grace.<\/p>\n<p>God’s offer of covenant carried with it a divine promise: “You will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). The promise was one of extraordinary privilege; an entire nation was called upon to represent all other nations before the God of the universe. But the priestly office, though it carried privilege, was also a demanding office. A priest had to be pure and had to know the God whose presence he was required to enter. Thus Israel, the priestly nation, received a law that would provide direction in living, in loving God, and in serving all people. The law given with the covenant expressed the requirements for God’s covenant people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Covenant Law<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant law had two principal parts. First, the Ten Commandments expressed God’s requirements of Israel in a concise form (Ex 20:2-17). The commandments specified the covenant people’s relationship both to God and to other human beings. Although the tendency in the present day is to view the Ten Commandments as a system of ethics or morality, they had a different role in ancient Israel. The covenant law was the foundation or constitution of a new nation, a special “nation of priests.” The head of the nation-state was God. Hence, in ancient Israel the status of the Ten Commandments was approximately that of the code of criminal law in a modern nation-state. To break one of those laws was to commit a crime against God, the head of the state. Yet the laws had a positive purpose. They set down a way of life that would result in a full and rich communion with God and community with others.<\/p>\n<p>The second part of the covenant law was a detailed law code covering the activities of everyday life. Examples of such laws are found in Exodus 21–23. These laws were compiled and recorded in the “Book of the Covenant” (Ex 24:7). Although many laws were contained in this book, it was impossible to codify every aspect of human behavior. The diversity of the examples given indicates that for the covenant member no area of human life was beyond the influence of the covenant. Persons who entered into a relationship with God entered into a relationship that impinged on every possible aspect of their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Renewal<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant at Sinai was made with a particular group of people under the leadership of Moses but was binding on future generations. Consequently, the covenant was renewed from time to time. Covenant renewals are recorded in the time of Joshua (Jos 8:30-35; 24:1-28) and, much later, during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>The most important passage in the Bible for understanding covenant renewal and the nature of covenant is the book of Deuteronomy. The entire book describes a particular covenant renewal ceremony that occurred at a critical juncture in Israel’s early history. The Sinai covenant was renewed just before Moses’ death, before the transition of leadership to Joshua, and before a major military campaign to possess the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant since the time of Abraham had contained a promise of land. Immediately before they entered that land (c. 1250 <span>BC<\/span>), the covenant vows were renewed with a new generation of Israelites, most of whom had not stood at the foot of Mt Sinai some 40 years earlier. Although covenant renewal is the central theme of Deuteronomy, the writer focused primarily on Moses’ sermon rather than on a detailed account of the renewal ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ceremony were simply a repetition of what happened at the original ratification of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were repeated (Dt 5:6-21), and the laws of the Book of the Covenant were expounded in greater detail (Dt 12–26). Two points emerging in Deuteronomy are particularly significant for an understanding of covenant: a clear statement of covenant love and a detailed statement of the blessings and curses that accompanied the making and renewing of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCovenantwithDavid\">The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>The covenant tradition underwent modification during the time of King David (c. 1000 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sinai covenant had been established between God and Israel, with Moses acting as mediator. In David’s time an additional element was added: God entered into a covenant with David as king. That royal covenant was intimated to David through the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:8-16), indicating once again the divine initiative. It was to be an everlasting covenant with David’s royal lineage (23:5).<\/p>\n\n<p>Christians generally interpret the covenant with David as a messianic covenant. For several centuries the dynasty established by David ruled a united Israel, then ruled the remaining southern kingdom of Judah. But in 586 <span>BC<\/span> Judah was conquered by the Babylonians. At that point a descendant of David was no longer ruling an independent kingdom of God’s chosen people. The everlasting nature of the covenant with David was brought out, however, not in the pages of ancient history but in the expectation of a Messiah who would be born of David’s descendants. Matthew and Luke both pointed to Jesus’ Davidic descent (Mt 1:1; Lk 3:31). The NT thus extends the covenant acts of God into the new age in the person of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNewCovenantPredictedintheOldTestament\">The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although David’s covenant with God was eternal, in a sense the covenant established with Israel on Mt Sinai was temporal. The Sinai covenant included conditional clauses, stated in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy. Israel’s disobedience of the covenant law would at worst bring exile from the Promised Land, a central covenant theme from Abraham to Moses and beyond.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew prophets often perceived the danger of an end to the covenant as a result of Israel’s sins. Some of the prophets, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, also perceived a deeper truth; namely, that the covenant was rooted in divine love and that therefore even the curse of God could not be final.<\/p>\n<p>Hosea dramatically expressed that truth through the “living parable” of his marriage (Hos 1–3). He married Gomer at God’s command, but later, as a result of her unfaithfulness, the marital covenant was dissolved by divorce. Although Gomer’s adulterous acts compelled Hosea to divorce her, he did not cease to love her. God later commanded Hosea to go back to Gomer (Hos 3:1). Despite her unfaithfulness, the prophet was to take her again into the covenant relationship of marriage. That acted-out parable depicted God’s actions with Israel. Israel’s sin would inevitably culminate in a divorce from God, but Hosea perceived a new marriage. In the new covenant between God and Israel, Israel would be graciously accepted back into a relationship with God (2:14-18).<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant is given powerful expression in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In his lifetime Jeremiah saw the kingdom of Judah defeated in war. The nation lost its independence and became a vassal of the Babylonian Empire. In an external sense, that defeat in 586 <span>BC<\/span> marked the end of the Sinai covenant. Israel could no longer call the Promised Land its own. Yet Jeremiah perceived a truth beyond the contemporary political realities. God’s work in the world, like his love for the world, was not over.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant that God would bring into effect: “The days are coming, says the <span>Lord<\/span>, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The new covenant would be marked by an act of God within human hearts, a radical spiritual transformation (Jer 31:34). At the Last Supper Jesus declared to his disciples that “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). To the writer of Hebrews, the new covenant was central to a full understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ (Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is a concept central to the message and the history of the OT. The covenant theme continues into the NT as a way of interpreting the Christian gospel. Meaning in human life is to be found in a covenant relationship with the living God. Yet sinful human beings cannot work their way into such a relationship; God alone can initiate it. According to the NT, God’s act in giving his son, Jesus, to die opened up the covenant relationship to all human beings. The forgiveness made available by Jesus’ “blood of the new covenant” makes it possible for any individual to enter into a covenant relationship with God. Entry into such a relationship, today as in Abraham’s time, hinges upon faith (Gal 3:6-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Alliance; Covenant, The New; Law, Biblical Concept of; Oath; Vows.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVENANT Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings. The covenant theme in the OT is developed from...","summary_en":"COVENANT Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings. The covenant theme in the OT is developed from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9443,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Deuteronomy","title_en":"Book of Deuteronomy","content_ro":"<h3>DEUTERONOMY, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for the nation of Israel. Moses’ reminders of the wilderness wanderings and the Ten Commandments, plus his instructions for life in the Promised Land, are a vital part of the OT covenant literature.<\/p>\n\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>• Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>• Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandAuthorship\">Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>Two basic views (with variations) on the date and authorship of Deuteronomy are advocated by modern biblical scholars. Those who consider Moses the author date the book in the 14th or 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. Others believe that it was composed by an unknown author in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>, when Josiah was king in the southern kingdom of Judah.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for a Seventh-Century Date<\/h5>\n<p>As early as 1805, W. M. L. de Wette advocated that Deuteronomy was used by Josiah in his seventh-century reforms, and that it was written shortly before that. Biblical critic Julius Wellhausen adopted that view, which has been advocated by many scholars ever since S. R. Driver publicized it in his <em>Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament<\/em> (1891). According to that view, the book was written late but ascribed to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>Many modern scholars, such as Gerhard von Rad and G. E. Wright, regard Moses as the founder of Israel’s faith. They argue that whatever in Deuteronomy is from Moses was transmitted orally until about the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. Denying that Moses actually wrote Deuteronomy, they attribute its present form to numerous writers and editors over an extended period of centuries.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for Mosaic Authorship<\/h5>\n<p>In recent decades, studies of Hittite suzerainty treaties from the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> have yielded interesting comparisons between those treaty forms and the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. In 1954 G. Mendenhall suggested that the form of the covenant at Mt Sinai was the same literary form used by Hittites in treaties with Syrian vassal states during the 14th and 13th centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In 1960 M. G. Kline applied that idea to the book of Deuteronomy, seeing it as a renewal of the Sinaitic covenant and outlining its structure as a literary unit reflecting the pattern of Hittite covenant forms.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy does contain certain parallels to Hittite vassal treaties. As a renewal treaty it appeals to the covenant of God with Israel at Mt Sinai, recorded in the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>1. The “preamble” in ancient Hittite treaties usually identified the suzerain or ruler. In Deuteronomy 1:1-5 (Ex 20:1) Moses as the speaker represents God, the King of Israel. As his death approaches, Moses makes an appeal for the renewal of the covenant.<\/p>\n<li>2. In the “historical prologue” the suzerain usually cited the benefits he had bestowed on his vassal. In Deuteronomy 1:6–4:49 (Ex 20:2) Moses declares what God has done for Israel since his revelation at Mt Sinai. Moses reminds the people of Israel of God’s faithfulness even when they had been unfaithful.<\/li>\n<li>3. The “stipulations” were usually stated by the suzerain in the treaty’s third division. In Deuteronomy 5–26 Moses outlines the stipulations for Israel in their covenant relationship to God. The basic requirement in Deuteronomy 5–11 (Ex 20:3-17) is exclusive, wholehearted love for God. In the following chapters, Deuteronomy 12–26, the basic principle of exclusive love for God is applied to specific areas of culticceremonial consecration (Dt 12:1–16:17), judicial justice in government (16:18–21:23), the sanctity of God’s order (chs 22–25), and public acknowledgment of God as their Redeemer and King (ch 26).<\/li>\n<li>4. “Covenant ratification” usually contained a provision for treaty renewal and a formula for curses and blessings. In Deuteronomy 27 provision is made for Joshua to conclude the renewal of the covenant after the Israelites occupy the land. In addition, the divine threat and promise are expressed in blessings and curses as Israel swears its oath of allegiance on the plains of Moab.<\/li>\n<li>5. “Succession arrangements” were usually the concluding part of suzerainty-vassal treaties. In chapters 31–34 Joshua is designated as Moses’ successor. The written text is deposited in the sanctuary with the song of witness and a testamentary blessing by Moses. The book of Deuteronomy thus constitutes the documentary witness of God’s covenant as it concludes with the death of Moses.<\/li>\n<p>The fact that the literary structure of Deuteronomy parallels the legal forms characteristic of ancient Hittite treaties supports the traditional viewpoint that Moses is the author of Deuteronomy. When Moses is recognized as the mediator between God and Israel in the Sinaitic covenant, it is significant that the book of Deuteronomy represents Moses’ renewal of the covenant in the literary form current in the culture of his day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalSetting\">Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>Moses led the Israelites from Egypt through the wilderness to the plains of Moab east of the Dead Sea. Exodus 1–19 gives an account of the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt, the birth and preparation of Moses, his contest with the pharaoh, the miraculous deliverance out of Egypt, and the journey to Mt Sinai (probably also known as Mt Horeb).<\/p>\n<p>In that desert area God’s great revelation came to Israel through Moses (Ex 20–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 1–9). At Mt Sinai, God identified himself as the one who had delivered the Israelites. There he established an agreement by which they would be exclusively devoted to him as his holy nation. There the tabernacle was built and the priesthood established. Instructions were given for making sacrifices and offerings, and for observing feasts and seasons, so that Israel’s pattern of living would show that they were God’s holy people. The tribes were also organized for encampment around the tabernacle and for the march to Canaan, the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 10–21 is an account of the 38 years the Israelites spent in the wilderness. In 11 days they marched from Mt Horeb to Kadesh-barnea, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Beersheba. From there 12 spies were sent into Canaan. Their report produced a crisis in the form of a revolt against God. Subsequently, Israel wandered in the wilderness for 38 years, during which those who had been at least 20 years old when they left Egypt died. The new generation moved to the plains of Moab, located east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. Numbers 20–36 tells of the conquest and occupation of the land east of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy presents Moses’ address to the new generation of Israelites. In Exodus and Numbers God frequently speaks to Moses; in Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking at God’s command to the Israelites (Dt 1:1-4; 5:1; 29:1). In contrast to the preceding books, Deuteronomy has a style of exhortation in which Moses admonishes the new generation about their responsibility in view of the preceding generation’s failures. Whatever repetition occurs in Deuteronomy is carefully selected, with the specific purpose of warning the new generation so that they will not fail to conquer and occupy Canaan. Deuteronomy is not primarily retrospective; its outlook is optimistic about the future, offering hope for fulfilling the promises God made to the Israelites in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificanceofDeuteronomy\">Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>Deuteronomy (with Genesis, Psalms, and Isaiah) is among the most frequently quoted books in the early Christian centuries. More than 80 OT quotations in the NT come from Deuteronomy.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus focused attention on Deuteronomy when he summarized the essence of the entire OT Law and Prophets in the two great commandments of love for God and neighbor (Mt 22:37; see Dt 6:5; 10:19). Jesus also quoted Deuteronomy (6:13, 16; 8:3) in his temptation experience (Mt 4:4-10). Deuteronomy unfolds the essence of what God revealed to Moses at Mt Sinai. In Deuteronomy, Moses shares with the Israelites the core of God’s revelation without repeating details of sacrifices, observances, or rituals. He expounds the character of Israel’s faith and nationhood. Moses repeatedly emphasizes his concern that they faithfully maintain a good relationship with God. An exclusive devotion to God expressed in everyday life is the key to a lifetime of blessing.<\/p>\n<p>The primary need of love toward God and neighbor eventually became a basic requirement for the followers of Jesus Christ (Lk 10:25-28). The book of Deuteronomy is thus crucially important to the Christian concern to maintain a vital relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeuteronomyandtheLaw\">Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>To designate the book of Deuteronomy as a “second law” or a repetition of the law is misleading. Moses’ emphasis is not legalistic. Details of worship and ritual are not repeated or delineated to any great extent. Although the Ten Commandments are repeated, emphasis is placed on the first commandment, explicitly requiring exclusive devotion to God. Moses is primarily concerned with Israel’s relationship with God and their determination to maintain it in their own and their children’s lives.<\/p>\n<p>The NT reveals that a legalistic interpretation of the Mosaic revelation was held by the Jews of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Such legalism developed in Judaism especially during the intertestamental era. The Judaistic legalism of NT times has in modern times been ascribed wrongly to Moses. Moses did warn of the necessity of keeping all of God’s law (Dt 28:1, 58), but in Deuteronomy his message as a whole makes it clear that he was not exclusively concerned about legalistic observance. Rather, the central theme of Deuteronomy is the unique relationship that had been established by a unique God with a unique people, the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Brief Historical Review (1:1–4:43)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses is identified as the speaker, addressing the Israelites on the plains of Moab during the last year of his life. The Israelites were on the verge of entering the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>Moses began with a reference to Mt Sinai, scene of the greatest revelation in OT times. He focused attention on God’s explicit command for them to move up to Canaan and occupy the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Their rebellion brought divine judgment, so the conquest of Canaan had been delayed 38 years while an entire disobedient generation died in the wilderness.<\/p>\n<p>Instructed by God not to molest the Edomites or Moabites, Moses had led the Israelites to the Moab plains north of the Arnon River. The Israelites defeated Sihon, the Amorite king of Heshbon, and Og, king of Bashan. The tribes of Reuben and Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh appropriated the territory east of the Jordan River as their land (Nm 32). On the basis of that conquest, Moses encouraged Joshua to believe that God would aid him and the Israelites in the conquest of the land of Canaan west of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should learn from the mistakes of the generation that died in the wilderness (Dt 4:1-40). They should consider the fact that the word of God had been spoken to them. The revelation that had come to them through Moses was unique, and the most important thing was for them to revere the God who had revealed himself. The uniqueness of Israel’s God among the nations that worship idols should never be forgotten.<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the Israelites that they had entered into a contractual agreement with their unique God. That covenant was mentioned 26 more times by Moses. No nation had ever experienced anything like it. If Israel obeyed, they would enjoy God’s blessing and favor.<\/p>\n<h5>Exhortations and Applications (4:44–26:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The circumstances in which Moses addressed the Israelites are reported in a short transitional passage (Dt 4:44-49). From the slopes of Mt Pisgah (or Nebo), with Israel encamped in the valley opposite Beth-peor, Moses made his appeal to the people before they crossed the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ exposition of the “great commandment” is centered in the agreement made between God and Israel. He repeated the Ten Commandments as the essence of God’s revelation at Sinai. As Moses explained what God expected of Israel, he elaborated the first commandment: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (5:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). Their relationship with God was of basic importance, since God’s wrath will be against those who worship other gods (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Love is the key word in the relationship between God and Israel. Moses boldly asserted, “Hear, O Israel! The <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, the <span>Lord<\/span> alone. And you must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Dt 6:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>). All other commandments are significant because they bear on that relationship (as spelled out in chs 5–11).<\/p>\n<p>Exclusive love and devotion to God are essential. In a relationship of wholehearted love, no idols can be recognized or tolerated. Yet Moses wanted Israel to convey its consciousness of God to future generations by many external things: signs on their hands, frontlets (or “phylacteries”) on their foreheads, Scripture verses on their doorposts, and so on. By precept and example they should convey to their children that they love God (Dt 6).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should never forget that God had chosen them to be his people (Dt 7). They were to execute God’s judgment on the Canaanites, who had been spared judgment since Abraham’s time (Gn 15:16). Although the Israelites themselves did not merit God’s love, in love and mercy he had redeemed them out of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Moses appealed to the people to remember what God had done for them (Dt 8). To God’s sustaining provisions they should respond with thankfulness, recognizing that the power to achieve anything they had done had been God’s gift.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had repeatedly failed in their faith and commitment to God (9:1–10:11). Through Moses’ intercession they had been spared. It was for no merit of their own that they would enter Canaan; that was God’s gracious provision for them. Moses’ appeal for a wholehearted commitment is summarized in Deuteronomy 10:12–11:32. It is necessary to display reverence, respect, love, and obedience to God (see also 6:5, 13, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The God whom the Israelites must love sincerely and without reservation is the Lord of the cosmos. He is the righteous judge who rules supreme over all nature and history. God loved their forefathers, the patriarchs. He redeemed the Israelites from Egyptian enslavement and gave them his covenant. He manifested himself in helping the orphans, widows, and strangers. He multiplied Israel to be as numerous as the stars of the heavens.<\/p>\n<p>Moses gave two basic instructions to apply in daily life to maintain their relationship with God as a reality: “circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart” (Dt 10:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). He did not refer to physical circumcision, a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gn 17). Circumcision, which was not observed during the years of wilderness wanderings, was reinstituted under Joshua after the Israelites crossed the Jordan River (Jos 5:2-9). Moses referred to “spiritual circumcision” (see Lv 26:40-41; Jer 4:4; 9:25; Rom 2:29). All things that might restrict, interfere with, or negate total devotion to God were to be cut away (circumcised) so that the Israelites would continue to love God with all their heart.<\/p>\n<p>“Love the foreigner” (Dt 10:19) ranks second in importance to wholehearted love for God. Love for the stranger or neighbor is basic to all other human obligations (see Lv 19:9-18). Social obligations issue out of a person’s relationship with God. Being recipients of God’s love, the Israelites were to love others. They were to remember God’s love for them when they were slaves and strangers in Egypt. God loves the stranger, the widow, and the orphan; therefore, if anyone loves God, he or she is under obligation to love other people. God is concerned about justice and righteousness; a person who professes to love God must be concerned about just treatment for other people.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites were to be known for their concern for people whose social position exposed them to exploitation and oppression. The profound humanitarian spirit of the Mosaic law stands in unique contrast to the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian and Hittite law codes of that day. In those codes human relationships reflected no vital consciousness of a love relationship with deity.<\/p>\n<p>In the first century <span>AD<\/span> Jesus Christ came into conflict with Jewish religious leaders who had lost the essence of God’s law in a maze of legalism. For Jesus, the greatest commandment was to love God; the second was to love one’s neighbor. Those two commandments (which constitute the essence of the entire OT revelation) would, if kept perfectly, provide the basis for eternal life (Mt 22:37-39; Mk 12:29-31; Lk 10:27-28). Christians believe that the climax of God’s revelation of love came in Jesus Christ. For them, responding to God’s love means to accept Jesus Christ in wholehearted devotion and to love one’s neighbor as Jesus exemplified in his life.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 12:1–26:19, Moses gave instruction in practical living for a God-related people when they resided in the land God had promised to them. Having once survived on manna supplied directly by God, in Canaan they would enjoy the fruit and produce of the land. They would also encounter a culture permeated by Canaanite religion.<\/p>\n<p>In worshiping God in their new setting, they were cautioned to maintain due sanctity (Dt 12:1–14:21). They were not to worship at pagan shrines. They should bring their offerings to divinely appointed places for fellowship and rejoicing together in the Lord’s presence. Idolatry was not to be tolerated in any form. Any prophet who deviated from the law of Moses in advising the worship of other gods should be stoned. Exclusive devotion to God was to be daily practice.<\/p>\n<p>Canaan’s abundant blessings should be shared with neighbors (14:22–15:23). Tithes should be brought to the central sanctuary where Levites assisted the priests in religious ministration. Joy in sharing life’s blessings and opportunities was to characterize Israel’s pattern of living.<\/p>\n<p>Moses prescribed three annual pilgrimages (16:1-17). The people should remember their deliverance out of Egypt by observing the feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread. Seven weeks later, when the barley harvest was completed, they should spend time rejoicing before the Lord in a one-day festival called the Feast of Weeks. When the vintage as well as the grain harvest was completed, they were to observe the Feast of Ingathering (or Booths), a time of thanksgiving and sharing with others. Every seven years the law was read at the Feast of Ingathering.<\/p>\n<p>In human relations justice was to prevail among the Israelites (16:18–21:23). The Book of the Law kept at the main sanctuary was their divine authority, providing God’s instructions for them. The king was to have a copy of this law and govern his life in accordance with it. Prophets and priests played an important role as religious leaders in the life of Israel. Judicial authority was vested in the priests. In contrast to the brutality of other nations, humanitarian principles were to prevail in Israel’s warfare. Fathers were responsible for their own family households.<\/p>\n<p>In domestic and social relationships, the law of love was to prevail (22:1–26:19). Many regulations governed family life. In matters of sustenance, wages, and business dealings, the Israelites were admonished to be compassionate and just. Promises and warnings raised their consciousness about using the resources of land and animals entrusted to them so that their stewardship would please God.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 26, Moses instructed the Israelites in two liturgical confessions and a reaffirmation of the covenant. By acknowledging that God was the giver of all they had, and by confessing before God that they shared his gifts with others, they confirmed their covenant with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Alternatives: Blessings or Curses (27:1–30:20)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses set before the Israelites the alternatives of blessings or curses. Under Joshua they were to renew the covenant publicly. At Mt Ebal stones were to be erected for inscribing the law and an altar constructed for offering sacrifice. The curses were to be read from Mt Ebal and the blessings from Mt Gerizim. Conditional self-curses were read regarding offenses against God and other human beings (Dt 27:15-26). Thus they acknowledged their accountability to God. Though their sins might be hidden from people, it was God to whom they were primarily and ultimately accountable. Blessings as a way of life and curses as a way of death were clearly set before the Israelites (ch 28). Setting them in the perspective of history, Moses appealed to the new generation to take advantage of their present opportunity (ch 29). Warning that, should they fail to love God, they would ultimately be subjected to dispersion, Moses admonished them to choose the way of life and good rather than the way of death and evil (ch 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Transition: from Moses to Joshua (31:1–34:12)<\/h5>\n<p>When the life and ministry of Moses were nearing completion, and transfer of leadership was near (Dt 31:1–34:12), Joshua had already been designated by God as Israel’s new leader. Moses assured the Israelites that God would be the same with Joshua in charge. The revelation given through Moses had been put in writing and now was committed to the priests, the custodians of the Book of the Law. Joshua, who had already distinguished himself in responsible leadership, was publicly confirmed at the door of the tabernacle (31:1-29).<\/p>\n<p>The “Song of Moses” is the covenant’s document of witness (32:1-47). In it Moses spoke with prophetic understanding as he recounted Israel’s past experience. Reiterating the consequences of their attitude toward God, he assured the people of restoration if they failed again. He encouraged them to fix their hearts on what God had revealed to them and to impress it on their children. Keeping the covenant by maintaining a wholehearted love for God would be important for all future generations as well as for those then listening to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>After some final, brief instructions (32:48-52), Moses pronounced his blessings on the Israelites, whom he had led for 40 years (33:1-29). In his final blessing, also called the “Testament of Moses,” the greatness of God and his special relationship with Israel are delineated. Israel is unique among all the nations of the world.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy appropriately ends with an account of the death of Moses, the greatest prophet in OT times (34:1-12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Moses.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEUTERONOMY, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for the nation of Israel. Moses’ reminders of the wilderness wanderings and the Ten Commandments, plus his instructions for life in the Promised Land, are a vital part of the OT covenant literature.<\/p>\n\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>• Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>• Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandAuthorship\">Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>Two basic views (with variations) on the date and authorship of Deuteronomy are advocated by modern biblical scholars. Those who consider Moses the author date the book in the 14th or 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. Others believe that it was composed by an unknown author in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>, when Josiah was king in the southern kingdom of Judah.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for a Seventh-Century Date<\/h5>\n<p>As early as 1805, W. M. L. de Wette advocated that Deuteronomy was used by Josiah in his seventh-century reforms, and that it was written shortly before that. Biblical critic Julius Wellhausen adopted that view, which has been advocated by many scholars ever since S. R. Driver publicized it in his <em>Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament<\/em> (1891). According to that view, the book was written late but ascribed to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>Many modern scholars, such as Gerhard von Rad and G. E. Wright, regard Moses as the founder of Israel’s faith. They argue that whatever in Deuteronomy is from Moses was transmitted orally until about the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. Denying that Moses actually wrote Deuteronomy, they attribute its present form to numerous writers and editors over an extended period of centuries.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for Mosaic Authorship<\/h5>\n<p>In recent decades, studies of Hittite suzerainty treaties from the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> have yielded interesting comparisons between those treaty forms and the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. In 1954 G. Mendenhall suggested that the form of the covenant at Mt Sinai was the same literary form used by Hittites in treaties with Syrian vassal states during the 14th and 13th centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In 1960 M. G. Kline applied that idea to the book of Deuteronomy, seeing it as a renewal of the Sinaitic covenant and outlining its structure as a literary unit reflecting the pattern of Hittite covenant forms.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy does contain certain parallels to Hittite vassal treaties. As a renewal treaty it appeals to the covenant of God with Israel at Mt Sinai, recorded in the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>1. The “preamble” in ancient Hittite treaties usually identified the suzerain or ruler. In Deuteronomy 1:1-5 (Ex 20:1) Moses as the speaker represents God, the King of Israel. As his death approaches, Moses makes an appeal for the renewal of the covenant.<\/p>\n<li>2. In the “historical prologue” the suzerain usually cited the benefits he had bestowed on his vassal. In Deuteronomy 1:6–4:49 (Ex 20:2) Moses declares what God has done for Israel since his revelation at Mt Sinai. Moses reminds the people of Israel of God’s faithfulness even when they had been unfaithful.<\/li>\n<li>3. The “stipulations” were usually stated by the suzerain in the treaty’s third division. In Deuteronomy 5–26 Moses outlines the stipulations for Israel in their covenant relationship to God. The basic requirement in Deuteronomy 5–11 (Ex 20:3-17) is exclusive, wholehearted love for God. In the following chapters, Deuteronomy 12–26, the basic principle of exclusive love for God is applied to specific areas of culticceremonial consecration (Dt 12:1–16:17), judicial justice in government (16:18–21:23), the sanctity of God’s order (chs 22–25), and public acknowledgment of God as their Redeemer and King (ch 26).<\/li>\n<li>4. “Covenant ratification” usually contained a provision for treaty renewal and a formula for curses and blessings. In Deuteronomy 27 provision is made for Joshua to conclude the renewal of the covenant after the Israelites occupy the land. In addition, the divine threat and promise are expressed in blessings and curses as Israel swears its oath of allegiance on the plains of Moab.<\/li>\n<li>5. “Succession arrangements” were usually the concluding part of suzerainty-vassal treaties. In chapters 31–34 Joshua is designated as Moses’ successor. The written text is deposited in the sanctuary with the song of witness and a testamentary blessing by Moses. The book of Deuteronomy thus constitutes the documentary witness of God’s covenant as it concludes with the death of Moses.<\/li>\n<p>The fact that the literary structure of Deuteronomy parallels the legal forms characteristic of ancient Hittite treaties supports the traditional viewpoint that Moses is the author of Deuteronomy. When Moses is recognized as the mediator between God and Israel in the Sinaitic covenant, it is significant that the book of Deuteronomy represents Moses’ renewal of the covenant in the literary form current in the culture of his day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalSetting\">Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>Moses led the Israelites from Egypt through the wilderness to the plains of Moab east of the Dead Sea. Exodus 1–19 gives an account of the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt, the birth and preparation of Moses, his contest with the pharaoh, the miraculous deliverance out of Egypt, and the journey to Mt Sinai (probably also known as Mt Horeb).<\/p>\n<p>In that desert area God’s great revelation came to Israel through Moses (Ex 20–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 1–9). At Mt Sinai, God identified himself as the one who had delivered the Israelites. There he established an agreement by which they would be exclusively devoted to him as his holy nation. There the tabernacle was built and the priesthood established. Instructions were given for making sacrifices and offerings, and for observing feasts and seasons, so that Israel’s pattern of living would show that they were God’s holy people. The tribes were also organized for encampment around the tabernacle and for the march to Canaan, the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 10–21 is an account of the 38 years the Israelites spent in the wilderness. In 11 days they marched from Mt Horeb to Kadesh-barnea, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Beersheba. From there 12 spies were sent into Canaan. Their report produced a crisis in the form of a revolt against God. Subsequently, Israel wandered in the wilderness for 38 years, during which those who had been at least 20 years old when they left Egypt died. The new generation moved to the plains of Moab, located east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. Numbers 20–36 tells of the conquest and occupation of the land east of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy presents Moses’ address to the new generation of Israelites. In Exodus and Numbers God frequently speaks to Moses; in Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking at God’s command to the Israelites (Dt 1:1-4; 5:1; 29:1). In contrast to the preceding books, Deuteronomy has a style of exhortation in which Moses admonishes the new generation about their responsibility in view of the preceding generation’s failures. Whatever repetition occurs in Deuteronomy is carefully selected, with the specific purpose of warning the new generation so that they will not fail to conquer and occupy Canaan. Deuteronomy is not primarily retrospective; its outlook is optimistic about the future, offering hope for fulfilling the promises God made to the Israelites in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificanceofDeuteronomy\">Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>Deuteronomy (with Genesis, Psalms, and Isaiah) is among the most frequently quoted books in the early Christian centuries. More than 80 OT quotations in the NT come from Deuteronomy.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus focused attention on Deuteronomy when he summarized the essence of the entire OT Law and Prophets in the two great commandments of love for God and neighbor (Mt 22:37; see Dt 6:5; 10:19). Jesus also quoted Deuteronomy (6:13, 16; 8:3) in his temptation experience (Mt 4:4-10). Deuteronomy unfolds the essence of what God revealed to Moses at Mt Sinai. In Deuteronomy, Moses shares with the Israelites the core of God’s revelation without repeating details of sacrifices, observances, or rituals. He expounds the character of Israel’s faith and nationhood. Moses repeatedly emphasizes his concern that they faithfully maintain a good relationship with God. An exclusive devotion to God expressed in everyday life is the key to a lifetime of blessing.<\/p>\n<p>The primary need of love toward God and neighbor eventually became a basic requirement for the followers of Jesus Christ (Lk 10:25-28). The book of Deuteronomy is thus crucially important to the Christian concern to maintain a vital relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeuteronomyandtheLaw\">Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>To designate the book of Deuteronomy as a “second law” or a repetition of the law is misleading. Moses’ emphasis is not legalistic. Details of worship and ritual are not repeated or delineated to any great extent. Although the Ten Commandments are repeated, emphasis is placed on the first commandment, explicitly requiring exclusive devotion to God. Moses is primarily concerned with Israel’s relationship with God and their determination to maintain it in their own and their children’s lives.<\/p>\n<p>The NT reveals that a legalistic interpretation of the Mosaic revelation was held by the Jews of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Such legalism developed in Judaism especially during the intertestamental era. The Judaistic legalism of NT times has in modern times been ascribed wrongly to Moses. Moses did warn of the necessity of keeping all of God’s law (Dt 28:1, 58), but in Deuteronomy his message as a whole makes it clear that he was not exclusively concerned about legalistic observance. Rather, the central theme of Deuteronomy is the unique relationship that had been established by a unique God with a unique people, the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Brief Historical Review (1:1–4:43)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses is identified as the speaker, addressing the Israelites on the plains of Moab during the last year of his life. The Israelites were on the verge of entering the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>Moses began with a reference to Mt Sinai, scene of the greatest revelation in OT times. He focused attention on God’s explicit command for them to move up to Canaan and occupy the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Their rebellion brought divine judgment, so the conquest of Canaan had been delayed 38 years while an entire disobedient generation died in the wilderness.<\/p>\n<p>Instructed by God not to molest the Edomites or Moabites, Moses had led the Israelites to the Moab plains north of the Arnon River. The Israelites defeated Sihon, the Amorite king of Heshbon, and Og, king of Bashan. The tribes of Reuben and Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh appropriated the territory east of the Jordan River as their land (Nm 32). On the basis of that conquest, Moses encouraged Joshua to believe that God would aid him and the Israelites in the conquest of the land of Canaan west of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should learn from the mistakes of the generation that died in the wilderness (Dt 4:1-40). They should consider the fact that the word of God had been spoken to them. The revelation that had come to them through Moses was unique, and the most important thing was for them to revere the God who had revealed himself. The uniqueness of Israel’s God among the nations that worship idols should never be forgotten.<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the Israelites that they had entered into a contractual agreement with their unique God. That covenant was mentioned 26 more times by Moses. No nation had ever experienced anything like it. If Israel obeyed, they would enjoy God’s blessing and favor.<\/p>\n<h5>Exhortations and Applications (4:44–26:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The circumstances in which Moses addressed the Israelites are reported in a short transitional passage (Dt 4:44-49). From the slopes of Mt Pisgah (or Nebo), with Israel encamped in the valley opposite Beth-peor, Moses made his appeal to the people before they crossed the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ exposition of the “great commandment” is centered in the agreement made between God and Israel. He repeated the Ten Commandments as the essence of God’s revelation at Sinai. As Moses explained what God expected of Israel, he elaborated the first commandment: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (5:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). Their relationship with God was of basic importance, since God’s wrath will be against those who worship other gods (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Love is the key word in the relationship between God and Israel. Moses boldly asserted, “Hear, O Israel! The <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, the <span>Lord<\/span> alone. And you must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Dt 6:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>). All other commandments are significant because they bear on that relationship (as spelled out in chs 5–11).<\/p>\n<p>Exclusive love and devotion to God are essential. In a relationship of wholehearted love, no idols can be recognized or tolerated. Yet Moses wanted Israel to convey its consciousness of God to future generations by many external things: signs on their hands, frontlets (or “phylacteries”) on their foreheads, Scripture verses on their doorposts, and so on. By precept and example they should convey to their children that they love God (Dt 6).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should never forget that God had chosen them to be his people (Dt 7). They were to execute God’s judgment on the Canaanites, who had been spared judgment since Abraham’s time (Gn 15:16). Although the Israelites themselves did not merit God’s love, in love and mercy he had redeemed them out of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Moses appealed to the people to remember what God had done for them (Dt 8). To God’s sustaining provisions they should respond with thankfulness, recognizing that the power to achieve anything they had done had been God’s gift.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had repeatedly failed in their faith and commitment to God (9:1–10:11). Through Moses’ intercession they had been spared. It was for no merit of their own that they would enter Canaan; that was God’s gracious provision for them. Moses’ appeal for a wholehearted commitment is summarized in Deuteronomy 10:12–11:32. It is necessary to display reverence, respect, love, and obedience to God (see also 6:5, 13, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The God whom the Israelites must love sincerely and without reservation is the Lord of the cosmos. He is the righteous judge who rules supreme over all nature and history. God loved their forefathers, the patriarchs. He redeemed the Israelites from Egyptian enslavement and gave them his covenant. He manifested himself in helping the orphans, widows, and strangers. He multiplied Israel to be as numerous as the stars of the heavens.<\/p>\n<p>Moses gave two basic instructions to apply in daily life to maintain their relationship with God as a reality: “circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart” (Dt 10:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). He did not refer to physical circumcision, a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gn 17). Circumcision, which was not observed during the years of wilderness wanderings, was reinstituted under Joshua after the Israelites crossed the Jordan River (Jos 5:2-9). Moses referred to “spiritual circumcision” (see Lv 26:40-41; Jer 4:4; 9:25; Rom 2:29). All things that might restrict, interfere with, or negate total devotion to God were to be cut away (circumcised) so that the Israelites would continue to love God with all their heart.<\/p>\n<p>“Love the foreigner” (Dt 10:19) ranks second in importance to wholehearted love for God. Love for the stranger or neighbor is basic to all other human obligations (see Lv 19:9-18). Social obligations issue out of a person’s relationship with God. Being recipients of God’s love, the Israelites were to love others. They were to remember God’s love for them when they were slaves and strangers in Egypt. God loves the stranger, the widow, and the orphan; therefore, if anyone loves God, he or she is under obligation to love other people. God is concerned about justice and righteousness; a person who professes to love God must be concerned about just treatment for other people.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites were to be known for their concern for people whose social position exposed them to exploitation and oppression. The profound humanitarian spirit of the Mosaic law stands in unique contrast to the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian and Hittite law codes of that day. In those codes human relationships reflected no vital consciousness of a love relationship with deity.<\/p>\n<p>In the first century <span>AD<\/span> Jesus Christ came into conflict with Jewish religious leaders who had lost the essence of God’s law in a maze of legalism. For Jesus, the greatest commandment was to love God; the second was to love one’s neighbor. Those two commandments (which constitute the essence of the entire OT revelation) would, if kept perfectly, provide the basis for eternal life (Mt 22:37-39; Mk 12:29-31; Lk 10:27-28). Christians believe that the climax of God’s revelation of love came in Jesus Christ. For them, responding to God’s love means to accept Jesus Christ in wholehearted devotion and to love one’s neighbor as Jesus exemplified in his life.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 12:1–26:19, Moses gave instruction in practical living for a God-related people when they resided in the land God had promised to them. Having once survived on manna supplied directly by God, in Canaan they would enjoy the fruit and produce of the land. They would also encounter a culture permeated by Canaanite religion.<\/p>\n<p>In worshiping God in their new setting, they were cautioned to maintain due sanctity (Dt 12:1–14:21). They were not to worship at pagan shrines. They should bring their offerings to divinely appointed places for fellowship and rejoicing together in the Lord’s presence. Idolatry was not to be tolerated in any form. Any prophet who deviated from the law of Moses in advising the worship of other gods should be stoned. Exclusive devotion to God was to be daily practice.<\/p>\n<p>Canaan’s abundant blessings should be shared with neighbors (14:22–15:23). Tithes should be brought to the central sanctuary where Levites assisted the priests in religious ministration. Joy in sharing life’s blessings and opportunities was to characterize Israel’s pattern of living.<\/p>\n<p>Moses prescribed three annual pilgrimages (16:1-17). The people should remember their deliverance out of Egypt by observing the feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread. Seven weeks later, when the barley harvest was completed, they should spend time rejoicing before the Lord in a one-day festival called the Feast of Weeks. When the vintage as well as the grain harvest was completed, they were to observe the Feast of Ingathering (or Booths), a time of thanksgiving and sharing with others. Every seven years the law was read at the Feast of Ingathering.<\/p>\n<p>In human relations justice was to prevail among the Israelites (16:18–21:23). The Book of the Law kept at the main sanctuary was their divine authority, providing God’s instructions for them. The king was to have a copy of this law and govern his life in accordance with it. Prophets and priests played an important role as religious leaders in the life of Israel. Judicial authority was vested in the priests. In contrast to the brutality of other nations, humanitarian principles were to prevail in Israel’s warfare. Fathers were responsible for their own family households.<\/p>\n<p>In domestic and social relationships, the law of love was to prevail (22:1–26:19). Many regulations governed family life. In matters of sustenance, wages, and business dealings, the Israelites were admonished to be compassionate and just. Promises and warnings raised their consciousness about using the resources of land and animals entrusted to them so that their stewardship would please God.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 26, Moses instructed the Israelites in two liturgical confessions and a reaffirmation of the covenant. By acknowledging that God was the giver of all they had, and by confessing before God that they shared his gifts with others, they confirmed their covenant with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Alternatives: Blessings or Curses (27:1–30:20)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses set before the Israelites the alternatives of blessings or curses. Under Joshua they were to renew the covenant publicly. At Mt Ebal stones were to be erected for inscribing the law and an altar constructed for offering sacrifice. The curses were to be read from Mt Ebal and the blessings from Mt Gerizim. Conditional self-curses were read regarding offenses against God and other human beings (Dt 27:15-26). Thus they acknowledged their accountability to God. Though their sins might be hidden from people, it was God to whom they were primarily and ultimately accountable. Blessings as a way of life and curses as a way of death were clearly set before the Israelites (ch 28). Setting them in the perspective of history, Moses appealed to the new generation to take advantage of their present opportunity (ch 29). Warning that, should they fail to love God, they would ultimately be subjected to dispersion, Moses admonished them to choose the way of life and good rather than the way of death and evil (ch 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Transition: from Moses to Joshua (31:1–34:12)<\/h5>\n<p>When the life and ministry of Moses were nearing completion, and transfer of leadership was near (Dt 31:1–34:12), Joshua had already been designated by God as Israel’s new leader. Moses assured the Israelites that God would be the same with Joshua in charge. The revelation given through Moses had been put in writing and now was committed to the priests, the custodians of the Book of the Law. Joshua, who had already distinguished himself in responsible leadership, was publicly confirmed at the door of the tabernacle (31:1-29).<\/p>\n<p>The “Song of Moses” is the covenant’s document of witness (32:1-47). In it Moses spoke with prophetic understanding as he recounted Israel’s past experience. Reiterating the consequences of their attitude toward God, he assured the people of restoration if they failed again. He encouraged them to fix their hearts on what God had revealed to them and to impress it on their children. Keeping the covenant by maintaining a wholehearted love for God would be important for all future generations as well as for those then listening to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>After some final, brief instructions (32:48-52), Moses pronounced his blessings on the Israelites, whom he had led for 40 years (33:1-29). In his final blessing, also called the “Testament of Moses,” the greatness of God and his special relationship with Israel are delineated. Israel is unique among all the nations of the world.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy appropriately ends with an account of the death of Moses, the greatest prophet in OT times (34:1-12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Moses.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEUTERONOMY, Book of Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for ...","summary_en":"DEUTERONOMY, Book of Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11477,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Exodus","title_en":"Book of Exodus","content_ro":"<h3>EXODUS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives the basis for this religious, political, and social life.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the book of Exodus is so frequently referred to in the OT and NT that theologians speak of an “exodus motif.” In Psalm 68, for example, David received assurance in remembering that his God was the same one who rescued Israel from Egypt. The prophet Jeremiah compared the future regathering of Israel to their exodus from Egypt as an even more miraculous event (Jer 16:14-15). The return of Jesus and his parents from Egypt is associated with the exodus in Matthew 2:13-15. The deliverance of the Jewish people from Egypt was interpreted as a prototype for God’s freeing of all his people, both Israel and the church. Thus, the message of the book of Exodus is foundational to understanding God’s plan of salvation throughout the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The English title “Exodus” comes from the Septuagint, a pre-Christian translation of the OT into Greek. The word means “a way out” or “departure” and refers to Israel’s rescue from Egypt. The Hebrew title is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shemoth<\/span> (“these are the names”), from the book’s opening words, referring to the names of the sons of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>According to tradition, Exodus and the entire Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) were written by Moses. Exodus was probably written at Mt Sinai or shortly after the events there, according to this view. There is much to support that claim: (1) The book states that Moses wrote God’s words in at least one book (Ex 17:14; 24:2, 7; 34:27-28). According to Deuteronomy 31:9, 24, Moses recorded God’s law in a book that was deposited beside the ark of the covenant as a witness for God. (2) Many OT writers referred to portions of Exodus as the “law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3; 2 Chr 34:14; Neh 8:1; 13:1). The NT, including the testimony of Jesus, calls Moses the author (Mk 7:10; 12:26; Jn 1:45; 7:19).<\/p>\n<p>Various other theories about the origin of Exodus have been proposed. Some scholars credit Moses with writing nearly the entire book. One writer claims that Moses was an unknown desert sheikh who never even met the Israelites. Some critics think they detect in the book several documents from various periods in Israel’s history that were finally put together by an editor centuries after Moses’ death. Others have isolated various literary forms, such as the “Song of Moses” (Ex 15), and traced their development. Another interpretation says that the exodus story was passed on by word of mouth for many generations before being written.<\/p>\n<p>Although such theories are held by biblical scholars, they deny what the text of the book repeatedly affirms: that Moses wrote Exodus. The book of Exodus contains evidence of being written by an eyewitness. Only such a person would recall, for example, that there were 12 fountains and 70 palm trees at Elim (Ex 15:27). The author shows a thorough knowledge of Egyptian court life, customs, and language. Some of the materials used to construct the tabernacle, such as acacia wood for its furniture (25:10) and rams’ skins for the outer covering (v 5), are found in Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula but not in Palestine. The book thus seems to have had a desert setting.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was not only commissioned by God to write the book of Exodus, but he was also well qualified. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty in his words and deeds” (Acts 7:22, <span>rsv<\/span>). In addition, the 40 years spent in the wilderness of Midian and Sinai gave him a thorough knowledge of the geography and wildlife of the regions through which the Israelites traveled. The events of the exodus—deliverance from the Egyptians and God’s giving of the law—were so central to the history of Israel that Moses took special care to preserve the record so it could be passed on to following generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>If one accepts the traditional view that Moses wrote Exodus, then the book is to be dated in the time of Moses. Two dates are generally suggested for the exodus from Egypt.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The “Late Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh who oppressed the Israelites was Seti I (Sethos, c. 1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Ramses II (c. 1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). The exodus would thus have occurred in 1290, and the conquest of Canaan would have begun in 1250. There are two principal arguments for this view: (1) According to Exodus 1:11, the Israelites were forced to build the store city of Rameses; therefore, Ramses II must have been ruling at the time. But the city of Rameses could have existed earlier under a different name and then been renamed after Ramses II when he rebuilt it. Or there could have been an earlier monarch named Ramses who commissioned its construction. (2) There is archaeological evidence of movements of people and widespread destruction in Canaan around 1250 <span>BC<\/span>. If this destruction was caused by the Hebrew conquest under Joshua, it would place the exodus around 1290. But it could just as easily have been the result of social turbulence and anarchy in the period of the Israelite judges, or of the military activities of neighboring peoples.<\/p>\n<h5>The “Early Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh of the oppression was Thutmose III (c. 1504–1450 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Amenhotep II (c. 1450–1424 <span>BC<\/span>). Thus, the exodus would have occurred about 1440, and the conquest would have begun around 1400. Three chief arguments support that view: (1) If the fourth year of King Solomon was 966 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 would place the exodus at 1446. (2) If the time of Jephthah was 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 300 years of Judges 11:26 would date the conquest at 1400. (3) The late date would not leave enough time for the period of the judges, which most chronologies indicate lasted between 300 and 400 years. On the basis of such biblical references to the date of the exodus, the early date appears preferable.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Some events in Egypt during the period covered by the book of Exodus shed additional light on the biblical record. Exodus 12:40 records that the Israelites lived in Egypt for 430 years. That would place the settling of Jacob and his family in Goshen (Gn 47:4, 11) at about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>, during the powerful 12th dynasty of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom. Around the turn of the century, two weaker dynasties followed. Semite invaders from Asia began to infiltrate northern (or Lower) Egypt. Those outsiders, known as the Hyksos, were able to displace the native dynasty with their own king around 1730. That was the “new king” who “did not know Joseph” (Ex 1:8). Being foreigners themselves, they were naturally concerned about the Israelites, who were too many and too mighty for them (v 9). Enslavement was the easiest solution to the problem of the Israelites. The Hyksos kings could use the new source of labor to enlarge Rameses, at that time the capital of Lower Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Not until about 1580 <span>BC<\/span> were the Egyptians, led by Ahmose, able to drive out the Hyksos and reestablish an Egyptian line of kings. Because the Israelites were still multiplying, despite their hard labor, the pharaohs of the 18th dynasty continued their bondage and decreed that all male children must be killed. When Moses was born (c. 1560 <span>BC<\/span>), that edict was still in effect. Thutmose I (1539–1514), the great empire builder and third of that dynasty, was pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>Thutmose I’s only surviving legal heir was a daughter, Hatshepsut. Her husband assumed the name Thutmose II (1514–1504). When he died, another of the pharaoh’s descendants was named the successor—Thutmose III (1504–1450), who was ten years old at the time. Hatshepsut took the kingdom from the young ruler and controlled it for 22 years (1503–1482). Such a strong-willed woman could have the nerve to disobey her father’s command by saving the life of a Hebrew baby and raising him in the palace at Thebes.<\/p>\n<p>Hatshepsut, who continued to rule despite Thutmose III’s coronation, possibly intended for Moses to have the throne, or at least a high position in the realm. Thutmose III, once he had full power after Hatshepsut’s death, would have been eager to do away with Moses. Moses’ hurried flight into the wilderness after killing the overseer fits well with such historical possibilities. Thutmose III’s death in 1450 <span>BC<\/span> opened the way for Moses to return and confront Pharaoh Amenhotep II with God’s command, “Let my people go.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the book of Exodus is to show how God’s promise to Abraham (Gn 15:12-16) was fulfilled when the Lord rescued the Israelite descendants of Abraham from Egyptian bondage. It also explains the origin of the Passover festival, the beginning of the nation by God’s establishment of a covenant with Israel, and the giving of the law on Mt Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus tells the moving story of a mighty God, creator of the universe, beyond all limitations of time and space, who intervenes in history on behalf of a helpless group of slaves. God defeats the ruler of the greatest empire on earth and then leads his oppressed people from that land to freedom. Exodus is the story of a single family that providentially grows into a multitude. Through God’s covenant a nation is formed, and through his law the nation is given stability and set apart from all its neighbors. The book of Exodus tells of an unusual man, whose 80 years of preparation are equally divided between the palace of a king and the pasture of a nomadic priest. Moses is a reluctant leader, but he defies the pharaoh, speaks with God face-to-face, and writes nearly one-fourth of the Hebrew Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>The God of Exodus is faithful. He makes promises and keeps them. Genesis 15:13-16 records an amazing prophecy: “Then the <span>Lord<\/span> said to Abram, ‘Know of a surety that your descendants will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs, and will be slaves there, and they will be oppressed for four hundred years; but I will bring judgment on the nation which they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. . . . And they shall come back here in the fourth generation’ ” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In response to this promise, Joseph, “at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his burial” (Heb 11:22, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>That promise provides a background for the drama of redemption on which the book of Exodus focuses. Redemption can be defined as “deliverance from the power of an alien dominion, and enjoyment of the resulting freedom.” It speaks of a deliverer and what he does to achieve deliverance. The book of Exodus is full of the vocabulary of redemption. It tells of the God who “remembers” his promise to the Hebrew patriarchs (Ex 2:24; 6:5). God “comes down to deliver” the Israelites (3:8), or “save” them (14:30; 15:2), in order to “bring them” out of the land of Egypt (3:10-12). Redemption involves these aspects:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Lord is the author of redemption. In Exodus 6:1-8, as God answered Moses’ prayer to deliver his people, he used the pronoun “I” 18 times to emphasize that he was the one initiating the action. The Hebrew descendants of Abraham had known God primarily by the Hebrew name “El,” a common title in the ancient Near East for the supreme deity. But in Exodus, Israel learned that God is “Jehovah” or “Yahweh.” That is his personal name, a reminder that he is the God of the covenant who personally cares for his people’s welfare. In Exodus 3:14, God told Moses, “I am who I am” or “I will be who I will be.” Some scholars think that statement shows that the name Yahweh comes from the Hebrew verb “to be.” In any case, the concept of “name” in the Hebrew culture is synonymous with “character.” To know the name of God is to know something of his character. Israel knew God as the one who is eternally self-existent yet present with them wherever they would go, acting on their behalf (Ex 3:12; 33:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. The reason for redemption was God’s promise to the forefathers of the Israelites. When God heard the groaning of the people of Israel, he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob (Ex 2:24; cf. 6:5). In response to their need, he selected an agent of redemption, the unwilling Moses. Moses exhausted every possible excuse, but God would not take no for an answer. Moses is a vivid example of how God prepares, empowers, and sustains his chosen servants, using them to accomplish his purpose.<\/li>\n<li>3. The motive of redemption was God’s grace and love (Ex 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7). The purpose of redemption was that Israel and the Egyptians might know God (6:7; 7:5; 8:10; 14:18). The Lord worked so that all who were involved—Moses, the Israelites, Pharaoh, and the Egyptians—would be sure that he alone is God. The Hebrew understanding of knowledge is not primarily intellectual but experience-oriented. The desired response to God’s action is not mere mental assent but also faith and obedience.<\/li>\n<li>4. Redemption is achieved in Exodus by miracles (4:21)—all natural processes controlled supernaturally by God. They are variously described as signs and wonders (7:3), great acts of judgment (6:6; 7:4), and “the finger of God” (8:19). Such miracles were not frivolous fireworks but purposeful works of God. Some of the miracles prove that Moses was sent by God. The miraculous plagues proved that God is supreme, for each of them was a direct challenge to one of the gods of Egypt: Osiris the river god, Yeqt the frog god, Ra (Re) the sun god, Athor the cattle god. The miracles in the wilderness proved that God fulfills all the needs of his people.<\/li>\n<li>5. The pharaoh was the villain—a picture of rebellious humanity confronted by God’s command (Ex 4:21-23). Ten times the pharaoh hardened his heart. Yet, in a sense, it was God who hardened the pharaoh’s heart, effecting the king’s decision to defy him.<\/li>\n<li>6. The Passover marked the purchase of redemption (Ex 12:23-27; 15:16). It was a clear example of salvation by substitution. When the death angel saw the blood on the doorposts and lintels, he passed by.<\/li>\n<li>7. The recipients of God’s redemption in Exodus were the Israelites. God took them as his own special people (6:7), and they were no longer free to do as they pleased. Even before the exodus he had claimed them, telling Pharaoh, “Israel is my first-born son, and I say to you, ‘Let my son go that he may serve me’ ” (4:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/li>\n<li>8. The demand of redemption was obedience. On the basis of his deliverance of the Israelites from bondage, God set forth the Ten Commandments (20:1-17) and the rest of the law for them to obey. The people, though quick to pledge their obedience (19:8; 24:3), were even quicker to disobey (32:8). Because the Lord is holy and wants his people to be holy and wholehearted in devotion (34:14), he must punish iniquity. But being compassionate, he also forgives. Throughout the centuries of Israel’s history, God pleaded with his people through the prophets to remember the exodus and repent (see Mi 6:3-4). The faithful responded in gratitude with Moses’ “song of redemption” (Ex 15; cf. Rv 15:3-4).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus can be divided into four sections, each describing one aspect of God’s dealings with the Israelites during the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Unveiling (Ex 1–6)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus begins with the 70 descendants of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt for the duration of a famine that was afflicting their land (cf. Gn 46–50). After more than a century of prosperity for the Israelites in the land of Goshen, a new dynasty is established in Egypt whose leaders are not friendly toward Israel. In order to stem the rapid growth of the Hebrew people, the Egyptians force them to do hard labor, building storage cities for the pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>A further command requires all Israelite male children to be killed at birth. The superintendents of the midwives do not comply, however, and God rewards them—not to show his approval of their lie but because they fear and obey God rather than the pharaoh. A new command calls for all male Israelite babies to be drowned in the Nile River. One special child, who escapes when Pharaoh’s daughter has his basket fished out of the Nile, is Moses. Ironically, Moses’ mother is paid by the princess to raise her own child, who grows up in the palace as the princess’s adopted son.<\/p>\n<p>As an adult, Moses chooses to identify with his Hebrew kin, a tribute to the early instruction given him by his godly parents (see Heb 11:24-26). He sets out to liberate Israel from the Egyptians, one man at a time. But he has to flee to Midian, at the eastern edge of the Sinai Peninsula or in Arabia beyond the northern top of the Gulf of Aqaba. Moses marries into the household of Jethro, also named Reuel. Reuel (“friend of God”) is probably the man’s personal name, and Jethro (“excellence”) his title. Because he is called a “priest of Midian” (Ex 2:16), some scholars have maintained a “Kenite hypothesis,” suggesting that Moses adopted the religion of his father-in-law and taught it to the Israelites. But the Bible states that Moses received his religion by a direct revelation from God. Jethro seems to believe only after he sees that God has rescued Israel from the Egyptians (18:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>While their future deliverer is in Midian, the Israelites continue to be oppressed and cry out to God in their misery (2:23-25). God responds by descending to his people. He came down to rescue Israel (3:8). He appears to Moses in a burning bush and identifies himself as the same God who promised the patriarchs a land “flowing with milk and honey” (3:17). Moses will lead the Israelites there, assisted by his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\n<p>Assured that God’s presence and miraculous signs will accompany him, Moses takes his wife Zipporah and his two sons and departs for Egypt. On the way, the Lord meets him and seeks to put him to death (4:24). That is probably the Hebrew way of saying that God strikes him with a mortal illness. Moses, who is going to deliver God’s people, has neglected the sign of the covenant in failing to circumcise one of his sons (Gn 17:14). Moses recovers after the rite is performed and continues on to Egypt, meeting Aaron at Mt Sinai. Their reception by the Israelites is more cordial than that of Pharaoh, who refuses to honor the God who sent Moses. Instead of releasing the Israelites to offer sacrifices to their God in the wilderness, he increases their burdens. The people complain to Moses, and Moses complains to God. God appears again to Moses (Ex 6), reassuring him that Israel will be delivered by divine power. God’s plan is not a failure—he is just beginning to put it into action.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Deliverance (Ex 7–19)<\/h5>\n<p>Chapters 7–12 record ten plagues with which God afflicts the Egyptians. Even before the first of them, the pharaoh has hardened his heart to defy God (7:13). There are three cycles of three plagues each:<\/p>\n\n<p> The first three plagues affect both the Egyptians and the Israelites; the Israelites are protected from the final six. The Egyptian magicians are able to duplicate the first two plagues, but when the third strikes, they admit, “This is the finger of God” (8:19). After the plague of flies covers the land, the pharaoh offers Moses the first of four compromises, but Moses refuses all of them (8:25-29; 10:8-11, 24-29). The first plagues are merely unpleasant, but the final ones are destructive and inflict much suffering. Since all of the plagues are common to that area, they themselves are not miraculous. The miracle is how the phenomena are multiplied and limited to the land of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The nine plagues serve to harden the pharaoh’s heart even more, so God prepares one final stroke. The death of every firstborn male, among both animals and humans, will be the fatal blow. God warns the Israelites to get ready to leave. To avert the death angel, they must put blood from an unblemished yearling male sheep or goat on their doorways. While they are eating the Passover meal, the death angel begins moving through the land of Egypt. In anguish the pharaoh drives the Israelites from the land; the slaves are free at last. Just as he has promised, the Lord goes before the children of Israel in a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night.<\/p>\n<p>But once again the pharaoh’s heart is hardened and he gives pursuit. God parts the waters of the sea with a great wind. The literal meaning of the name given that body of water is “sea of reeds.” It could refer to any shoreline where the water is sufficiently shallow for such plants to grow (see 1 Kgs 9:26, where the same term refers to the Gulf of Aqaba near Eloth). Whatever the location, there God hands the Egyptians their final defeat. The rescue is complete.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the Israelites respond with renewed faith in the Lord and with a song of victory and praise (Ex 14:31–15:21). Soon, however, thanksgiving turns into grumbling because of bitter water (15:22-26), lack of meat and bread (16:1-15), and lack of water (17:1-7). In each situation God provides for their need. He also gives them victory over the Amalekites (vv 8-16). As the Israelites approach Mt Sinai, Moses’ family rejoins him, accompanied by Jethro. Jethro now confesses his faith in the God of the Israelites and shares in a fellowship meal with the leaders. He also assists Moses in reorganizing the judicial system, then returns to Midian (ch 18).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites arrive at Mt Sinai, also called Horeb (3:1), and prepare to meet the Lord who has rescued them in fulfillment of his promise to Moses (v 12). The Lord establishes his covenant with Israel, taking them as his own possession, “a kingdom of priests, my holy nation.” They quickly respond, “We will certainly do everything the <span>Lord<\/span> asks of us” (19:5-8, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Instruction (Ex 20–24)<\/h5>\n<p>The God who redeems a people, who literally “buys them back from slavery,” has a right to make certain demands of them. The commandments God gives to Israel at Sinai are not burdensome requirements but protective guidelines for living as God’s people (20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Law (or Torah, meaning “instruction”) revealed at Sinai consists of three parts:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Ten Commandments (ch 20), addressing a person’s relationship to God and other people. Based on God’s nature (and therefore permanent), the Ten Commandments are unique in the history of the nations.<\/p>\n<li>2. The judgments (chs 21–23), social regulations for governing the people as a theocracy, similar in many ways to the law codes of Israel’s neighbors.<\/li>\n<li>3. Ordinances (chs 24–31) regulating religious ceremonies.<\/li>\n<p>All of the laws are given to Moses during the weeks he spends with God on the mountain.<\/p>\n<p>The Ten Commandments form the basis of all other laws in Israel (20:1-17). The first five deal with honoring the Lord, the second five with respecting one’s neighbor. The last commandment deals with one’s thoughts and intentions rather than with specific actions. It thus forms a safeguard against all sins not included in the first nine.<\/p>\n<p>The judgments recorded in chapters 21–23 deal with master-slave relationships (21:1-11), offenses punishable by death (vv 12-17), compensation for injury to persons or damage to property (21:18–22:15), various interpersonal relationships (22:16–23:9), and Sabbaths, feasts, and the offering of firstfruits (23:10-19). Many of the judgments would not take effect until Israel settled in the Promised Land. Accordingly, that section of the Law closes with a solemn warning against being rebellious and adopting pagan ways. It also contains a bright promise that God will drive out Israel’s enemies, protect his people from sickness, and grant them prosperity, if they obey the Lord’s commands (23:22).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 24 records a reaffirmation of the covenant between God and Israel, as Moses seals it with the blood of a sacrifice. In response, God appears to the leaders of the people, giving them a glimpse of his splendor. Then Moses ascends the mountain one more time to receive the stone tablets containing the commandments, as well as further instructions regarding the meeting tent (tabernacle), the priesthood, and worship.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Presence with his People (Ex 25–40)<\/h5>\n<p>After the Lord redeemed the Israelites, he told Moses, “I will make you my own special people, and I will be your God. And you will know that I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God who has rescued you from your slavery in Egypt” (6:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses had seen that wonderful promise fulfilled, yet one further step remained: “I want the people of Israel to build me a sacred residence where I can live among them” (25:8). God’s dwelling among his people is possible because God had descended to deliver the people and because they had pledged to meet his demands. God calls for a contribution from all whose hearts were willing to give, and he shows Moses a detailed pattern of the tabernacle and its furniture. Aaron and his sons are set apart to serve in the tent. Stipulations for the various offerings, including the Day of Atonement, are given. God tells Moses that he has chosen Bezalel and Oholiab to build the tabernacle and to craft its furnishings, having filled them with his Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime the Israelites, who so recently promised total obedience, grow impatient as Moses lingers for 40 days on the mountain. They demand that Aaron make an idol for them. Under pressure, Aaron complies and forms a molten calf, a representation of a pagan deity (32:4).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord informs Moses of the people’s idolatry, revelry, and immorality and says that he is angry enough to destroy all of them and start again with Moses’ offspring. Moses pleads for Israel until the Lord relents, then descends from the mountain to punish the people. Moses pleads again for forgiveness for Israel, and God in mercy pardons their terrible sin (34:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Once more God offers to make a covenant with the people (34:10). Moses spends another 40 days with the Lord, writing the commandments on tablets to replace those smashed when he saw the golden calf. When he returns to the people, his face shines from being in God’s presence, and he must keep it veiled.<\/p>\n<p>Now that Israel has been restored to God’s favor, the construction of the tabernacle can begin. The contributions are so generous that Moses must restrain the people from bringing any more. Finally, all is ready. Moses examines the tabernacle, and it is erected on the first day of the first month, nearly a year after the first Passover. The priests are consecrated, the lamps are lit, and the first burnt sacrifice is offered. A cloud descends, filling the tabernacle with the glory of the Lord. God dwells among his people, the goal of redemption has been attained, and the drama of the book of Exodus has come to an end.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Israel, History of; Moses; Plagues upon Egypt; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EXODUS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives the basis for this religious, political, and social life.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the book of Exodus is so frequently referred to in the OT and NT that theologians speak of an “exodus motif.” In Psalm 68, for example, David received assurance in remembering that his God was the same one who rescued Israel from Egypt. The prophet Jeremiah compared the future regathering of Israel to their exodus from Egypt as an even more miraculous event (Jer 16:14-15). The return of Jesus and his parents from Egypt is associated with the exodus in Matthew 2:13-15. The deliverance of the Jewish people from Egypt was interpreted as a prototype for God’s freeing of all his people, both Israel and the church. Thus, the message of the book of Exodus is foundational to understanding God’s plan of salvation throughout the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The English title “Exodus” comes from the Septuagint, a pre-Christian translation of the OT into Greek. The word means “a way out” or “departure” and refers to Israel’s rescue from Egypt. The Hebrew title is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shemoth<\/span> (“these are the names”), from the book’s opening words, referring to the names of the sons of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>According to tradition, Exodus and the entire Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) were written by Moses. Exodus was probably written at Mt Sinai or shortly after the events there, according to this view. There is much to support that claim: (1) The book states that Moses wrote God’s words in at least one book (Ex 17:14; 24:2, 7; 34:27-28). According to Deuteronomy 31:9, 24, Moses recorded God’s law in a book that was deposited beside the ark of the covenant as a witness for God. (2) Many OT writers referred to portions of Exodus as the “law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3; 2 Chr 34:14; Neh 8:1; 13:1). The NT, including the testimony of Jesus, calls Moses the author (Mk 7:10; 12:26; Jn 1:45; 7:19).<\/p>\n<p>Various other theories about the origin of Exodus have been proposed. Some scholars credit Moses with writing nearly the entire book. One writer claims that Moses was an unknown desert sheikh who never even met the Israelites. Some critics think they detect in the book several documents from various periods in Israel’s history that were finally put together by an editor centuries after Moses’ death. Others have isolated various literary forms, such as the “Song of Moses” (Ex 15), and traced their development. Another interpretation says that the exodus story was passed on by word of mouth for many generations before being written.<\/p>\n<p>Although such theories are held by biblical scholars, they deny what the text of the book repeatedly affirms: that Moses wrote Exodus. The book of Exodus contains evidence of being written by an eyewitness. Only such a person would recall, for example, that there were 12 fountains and 70 palm trees at Elim (Ex 15:27). The author shows a thorough knowledge of Egyptian court life, customs, and language. Some of the materials used to construct the tabernacle, such as acacia wood for its furniture (25:10) and rams’ skins for the outer covering (v 5), are found in Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula but not in Palestine. The book thus seems to have had a desert setting.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was not only commissioned by God to write the book of Exodus, but he was also well qualified. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty in his words and deeds” (Acts 7:22, <span>rsv<\/span>). In addition, the 40 years spent in the wilderness of Midian and Sinai gave him a thorough knowledge of the geography and wildlife of the regions through which the Israelites traveled. The events of the exodus—deliverance from the Egyptians and God’s giving of the law—were so central to the history of Israel that Moses took special care to preserve the record so it could be passed on to following generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>If one accepts the traditional view that Moses wrote Exodus, then the book is to be dated in the time of Moses. Two dates are generally suggested for the exodus from Egypt.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The “Late Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh who oppressed the Israelites was Seti I (Sethos, c. 1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Ramses II (c. 1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). The exodus would thus have occurred in 1290, and the conquest of Canaan would have begun in 1250. There are two principal arguments for this view: (1) According to Exodus 1:11, the Israelites were forced to build the store city of Rameses; therefore, Ramses II must have been ruling at the time. But the city of Rameses could have existed earlier under a different name and then been renamed after Ramses II when he rebuilt it. Or there could have been an earlier monarch named Ramses who commissioned its construction. (2) There is archaeological evidence of movements of people and widespread destruction in Canaan around 1250 <span>BC<\/span>. If this destruction was caused by the Hebrew conquest under Joshua, it would place the exodus around 1290. But it could just as easily have been the result of social turbulence and anarchy in the period of the Israelite judges, or of the military activities of neighboring peoples.<\/p>\n<h5>The “Early Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh of the oppression was Thutmose III (c. 1504–1450 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Amenhotep II (c. 1450–1424 <span>BC<\/span>). Thus, the exodus would have occurred about 1440, and the conquest would have begun around 1400. Three chief arguments support that view: (1) If the fourth year of King Solomon was 966 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 would place the exodus at 1446. (2) If the time of Jephthah was 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 300 years of Judges 11:26 would date the conquest at 1400. (3) The late date would not leave enough time for the period of the judges, which most chronologies indicate lasted between 300 and 400 years. On the basis of such biblical references to the date of the exodus, the early date appears preferable.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Some events in Egypt during the period covered by the book of Exodus shed additional light on the biblical record. Exodus 12:40 records that the Israelites lived in Egypt for 430 years. That would place the settling of Jacob and his family in Goshen (Gn 47:4, 11) at about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>, during the powerful 12th dynasty of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom. Around the turn of the century, two weaker dynasties followed. Semite invaders from Asia began to infiltrate northern (or Lower) Egypt. Those outsiders, known as the Hyksos, were able to displace the native dynasty with their own king around 1730. That was the “new king” who “did not know Joseph” (Ex 1:8). Being foreigners themselves, they were naturally concerned about the Israelites, who were too many and too mighty for them (v 9). Enslavement was the easiest solution to the problem of the Israelites. The Hyksos kings could use the new source of labor to enlarge Rameses, at that time the capital of Lower Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Not until about 1580 <span>BC<\/span> were the Egyptians, led by Ahmose, able to drive out the Hyksos and reestablish an Egyptian line of kings. Because the Israelites were still multiplying, despite their hard labor, the pharaohs of the 18th dynasty continued their bondage and decreed that all male children must be killed. When Moses was born (c. 1560 <span>BC<\/span>), that edict was still in effect. Thutmose I (1539–1514), the great empire builder and third of that dynasty, was pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>Thutmose I’s only surviving legal heir was a daughter, Hatshepsut. Her husband assumed the name Thutmose II (1514–1504). When he died, another of the pharaoh’s descendants was named the successor—Thutmose III (1504–1450), who was ten years old at the time. Hatshepsut took the kingdom from the young ruler and controlled it for 22 years (1503–1482). Such a strong-willed woman could have the nerve to disobey her father’s command by saving the life of a Hebrew baby and raising him in the palace at Thebes.<\/p>\n<p>Hatshepsut, who continued to rule despite Thutmose III’s coronation, possibly intended for Moses to have the throne, or at least a high position in the realm. Thutmose III, once he had full power after Hatshepsut’s death, would have been eager to do away with Moses. Moses’ hurried flight into the wilderness after killing the overseer fits well with such historical possibilities. Thutmose III’s death in 1450 <span>BC<\/span> opened the way for Moses to return and confront Pharaoh Amenhotep II with God’s command, “Let my people go.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the book of Exodus is to show how God’s promise to Abraham (Gn 15:12-16) was fulfilled when the Lord rescued the Israelite descendants of Abraham from Egyptian bondage. It also explains the origin of the Passover festival, the beginning of the nation by God’s establishment of a covenant with Israel, and the giving of the law on Mt Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus tells the moving story of a mighty God, creator of the universe, beyond all limitations of time and space, who intervenes in history on behalf of a helpless group of slaves. God defeats the ruler of the greatest empire on earth and then leads his oppressed people from that land to freedom. Exodus is the story of a single family that providentially grows into a multitude. Through God’s covenant a nation is formed, and through his law the nation is given stability and set apart from all its neighbors. The book of Exodus tells of an unusual man, whose 80 years of preparation are equally divided between the palace of a king and the pasture of a nomadic priest. Moses is a reluctant leader, but he defies the pharaoh, speaks with God face-to-face, and writes nearly one-fourth of the Hebrew Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>The God of Exodus is faithful. He makes promises and keeps them. Genesis 15:13-16 records an amazing prophecy: “Then the <span>Lord<\/span> said to Abram, ‘Know of a surety that your descendants will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs, and will be slaves there, and they will be oppressed for four hundred years; but I will bring judgment on the nation which they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. . . . And they shall come back here in the fourth generation’ ” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In response to this promise, Joseph, “at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his burial” (Heb 11:22, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>That promise provides a background for the drama of redemption on which the book of Exodus focuses. Redemption can be defined as “deliverance from the power of an alien dominion, and enjoyment of the resulting freedom.” It speaks of a deliverer and what he does to achieve deliverance. The book of Exodus is full of the vocabulary of redemption. It tells of the God who “remembers” his promise to the Hebrew patriarchs (Ex 2:24; 6:5). God “comes down to deliver” the Israelites (3:8), or “save” them (14:30; 15:2), in order to “bring them” out of the land of Egypt (3:10-12). Redemption involves these aspects:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Lord is the author of redemption. In Exodus 6:1-8, as God answered Moses’ prayer to deliver his people, he used the pronoun “I” 18 times to emphasize that he was the one initiating the action. The Hebrew descendants of Abraham had known God primarily by the Hebrew name “El,” a common title in the ancient Near East for the supreme deity. But in Exodus, Israel learned that God is “Jehovah” or “Yahweh.” That is his personal name, a reminder that he is the God of the covenant who personally cares for his people’s welfare. In Exodus 3:14, God told Moses, “I am who I am” or “I will be who I will be.” Some scholars think that statement shows that the name Yahweh comes from the Hebrew verb “to be.” In any case, the concept of “name” in the Hebrew culture is synonymous with “character.” To know the name of God is to know something of his character. Israel knew God as the one who is eternally self-existent yet present with them wherever they would go, acting on their behalf (Ex 3:12; 33:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. The reason for redemption was God’s promise to the forefathers of the Israelites. When God heard the groaning of the people of Israel, he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob (Ex 2:24; cf. 6:5). In response to their need, he selected an agent of redemption, the unwilling Moses. Moses exhausted every possible excuse, but God would not take no for an answer. Moses is a vivid example of how God prepares, empowers, and sustains his chosen servants, using them to accomplish his purpose.<\/li>\n<li>3. The motive of redemption was God’s grace and love (Ex 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7). The purpose of redemption was that Israel and the Egyptians might know God (6:7; 7:5; 8:10; 14:18). The Lord worked so that all who were involved—Moses, the Israelites, Pharaoh, and the Egyptians—would be sure that he alone is God. The Hebrew understanding of knowledge is not primarily intellectual but experience-oriented. The desired response to God’s action is not mere mental assent but also faith and obedience.<\/li>\n<li>4. Redemption is achieved in Exodus by miracles (4:21)—all natural processes controlled supernaturally by God. They are variously described as signs and wonders (7:3), great acts of judgment (6:6; 7:4), and “the finger of God” (8:19). Such miracles were not frivolous fireworks but purposeful works of God. Some of the miracles prove that Moses was sent by God. The miraculous plagues proved that God is supreme, for each of them was a direct challenge to one of the gods of Egypt: Osiris the river god, Yeqt the frog god, Ra (Re) the sun god, Athor the cattle god. The miracles in the wilderness proved that God fulfills all the needs of his people.<\/li>\n<li>5. The pharaoh was the villain—a picture of rebellious humanity confronted by God’s command (Ex 4:21-23). Ten times the pharaoh hardened his heart. Yet, in a sense, it was God who hardened the pharaoh’s heart, effecting the king’s decision to defy him.<\/li>\n<li>6. The Passover marked the purchase of redemption (Ex 12:23-27; 15:16). It was a clear example of salvation by substitution. When the death angel saw the blood on the doorposts and lintels, he passed by.<\/li>\n<li>7. The recipients of God’s redemption in Exodus were the Israelites. God took them as his own special people (6:7), and they were no longer free to do as they pleased. Even before the exodus he had claimed them, telling Pharaoh, “Israel is my first-born son, and I say to you, ‘Let my son go that he may serve me’ ” (4:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/li>\n<li>8. The demand of redemption was obedience. On the basis of his deliverance of the Israelites from bondage, God set forth the Ten Commandments (20:1-17) and the rest of the law for them to obey. The people, though quick to pledge their obedience (19:8; 24:3), were even quicker to disobey (32:8). Because the Lord is holy and wants his people to be holy and wholehearted in devotion (34:14), he must punish iniquity. But being compassionate, he also forgives. Throughout the centuries of Israel’s history, God pleaded with his people through the prophets to remember the exodus and repent (see Mi 6:3-4). The faithful responded in gratitude with Moses’ “song of redemption” (Ex 15; cf. Rv 15:3-4).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus can be divided into four sections, each describing one aspect of God’s dealings with the Israelites during the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Unveiling (Ex 1–6)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus begins with the 70 descendants of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt for the duration of a famine that was afflicting their land (cf. Gn 46–50). After more than a century of prosperity for the Israelites in the land of Goshen, a new dynasty is established in Egypt whose leaders are not friendly toward Israel. In order to stem the rapid growth of the Hebrew people, the Egyptians force them to do hard labor, building storage cities for the pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>A further command requires all Israelite male children to be killed at birth. The superintendents of the midwives do not comply, however, and God rewards them—not to show his approval of their lie but because they fear and obey God rather than the pharaoh. A new command calls for all male Israelite babies to be drowned in the Nile River. One special child, who escapes when Pharaoh’s daughter has his basket fished out of the Nile, is Moses. Ironically, Moses’ mother is paid by the princess to raise her own child, who grows up in the palace as the princess’s adopted son.<\/p>\n<p>As an adult, Moses chooses to identify with his Hebrew kin, a tribute to the early instruction given him by his godly parents (see Heb 11:24-26). He sets out to liberate Israel from the Egyptians, one man at a time. But he has to flee to Midian, at the eastern edge of the Sinai Peninsula or in Arabia beyond the northern top of the Gulf of Aqaba. Moses marries into the household of Jethro, also named Reuel. Reuel (“friend of God”) is probably the man’s personal name, and Jethro (“excellence”) his title. Because he is called a “priest of Midian” (Ex 2:16), some scholars have maintained a “Kenite hypothesis,” suggesting that Moses adopted the religion of his father-in-law and taught it to the Israelites. But the Bible states that Moses received his religion by a direct revelation from God. Jethro seems to believe only after he sees that God has rescued Israel from the Egyptians (18:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>While their future deliverer is in Midian, the Israelites continue to be oppressed and cry out to God in their misery (2:23-25). God responds by descending to his people. He came down to rescue Israel (3:8). He appears to Moses in a burning bush and identifies himself as the same God who promised the patriarchs a land “flowing with milk and honey” (3:17). Moses will lead the Israelites there, assisted by his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\n<p>Assured that God’s presence and miraculous signs will accompany him, Moses takes his wife Zipporah and his two sons and departs for Egypt. On the way, the Lord meets him and seeks to put him to death (4:24). That is probably the Hebrew way of saying that God strikes him with a mortal illness. Moses, who is going to deliver God’s people, has neglected the sign of the covenant in failing to circumcise one of his sons (Gn 17:14). Moses recovers after the rite is performed and continues on to Egypt, meeting Aaron at Mt Sinai. Their reception by the Israelites is more cordial than that of Pharaoh, who refuses to honor the God who sent Moses. Instead of releasing the Israelites to offer sacrifices to their God in the wilderness, he increases their burdens. The people complain to Moses, and Moses complains to God. God appears again to Moses (Ex 6), reassuring him that Israel will be delivered by divine power. God’s plan is not a failure—he is just beginning to put it into action.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Deliverance (Ex 7–19)<\/h5>\n<p>Chapters 7–12 record ten plagues with which God afflicts the Egyptians. Even before the first of them, the pharaoh has hardened his heart to defy God (7:13). There are three cycles of three plagues each:<\/p>\n\n<p> The first three plagues affect both the Egyptians and the Israelites; the Israelites are protected from the final six. The Egyptian magicians are able to duplicate the first two plagues, but when the third strikes, they admit, “This is the finger of God” (8:19). After the plague of flies covers the land, the pharaoh offers Moses the first of four compromises, but Moses refuses all of them (8:25-29; 10:8-11, 24-29). The first plagues are merely unpleasant, but the final ones are destructive and inflict much suffering. Since all of the plagues are common to that area, they themselves are not miraculous. The miracle is how the phenomena are multiplied and limited to the land of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The nine plagues serve to harden the pharaoh’s heart even more, so God prepares one final stroke. The death of every firstborn male, among both animals and humans, will be the fatal blow. God warns the Israelites to get ready to leave. To avert the death angel, they must put blood from an unblemished yearling male sheep or goat on their doorways. While they are eating the Passover meal, the death angel begins moving through the land of Egypt. In anguish the pharaoh drives the Israelites from the land; the slaves are free at last. Just as he has promised, the Lord goes before the children of Israel in a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night.<\/p>\n<p>But once again the pharaoh’s heart is hardened and he gives pursuit. God parts the waters of the sea with a great wind. The literal meaning of the name given that body of water is “sea of reeds.” It could refer to any shoreline where the water is sufficiently shallow for such plants to grow (see 1 Kgs 9:26, where the same term refers to the Gulf of Aqaba near Eloth). Whatever the location, there God hands the Egyptians their final defeat. The rescue is complete.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the Israelites respond with renewed faith in the Lord and with a song of victory and praise (Ex 14:31–15:21). Soon, however, thanksgiving turns into grumbling because of bitter water (15:22-26), lack of meat and bread (16:1-15), and lack of water (17:1-7). In each situation God provides for their need. He also gives them victory over the Amalekites (vv 8-16). As the Israelites approach Mt Sinai, Moses’ family rejoins him, accompanied by Jethro. Jethro now confesses his faith in the God of the Israelites and shares in a fellowship meal with the leaders. He also assists Moses in reorganizing the judicial system, then returns to Midian (ch 18).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites arrive at Mt Sinai, also called Horeb (3:1), and prepare to meet the Lord who has rescued them in fulfillment of his promise to Moses (v 12). The Lord establishes his covenant with Israel, taking them as his own possession, “a kingdom of priests, my holy nation.” They quickly respond, “We will certainly do everything the <span>Lord<\/span> asks of us” (19:5-8, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Instruction (Ex 20–24)<\/h5>\n<p>The God who redeems a people, who literally “buys them back from slavery,” has a right to make certain demands of them. The commandments God gives to Israel at Sinai are not burdensome requirements but protective guidelines for living as God’s people (20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Law (or Torah, meaning “instruction”) revealed at Sinai consists of three parts:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Ten Commandments (ch 20), addressing a person’s relationship to God and other people. Based on God’s nature (and therefore permanent), the Ten Commandments are unique in the history of the nations.<\/p>\n<li>2. The judgments (chs 21–23), social regulations for governing the people as a theocracy, similar in many ways to the law codes of Israel’s neighbors.<\/li>\n<li>3. Ordinances (chs 24–31) regulating religious ceremonies.<\/li>\n<p>All of the laws are given to Moses during the weeks he spends with God on the mountain.<\/p>\n<p>The Ten Commandments form the basis of all other laws in Israel (20:1-17). The first five deal with honoring the Lord, the second five with respecting one’s neighbor. The last commandment deals with one’s thoughts and intentions rather than with specific actions. It thus forms a safeguard against all sins not included in the first nine.<\/p>\n<p>The judgments recorded in chapters 21–23 deal with master-slave relationships (21:1-11), offenses punishable by death (vv 12-17), compensation for injury to persons or damage to property (21:18–22:15), various interpersonal relationships (22:16–23:9), and Sabbaths, feasts, and the offering of firstfruits (23:10-19). Many of the judgments would not take effect until Israel settled in the Promised Land. Accordingly, that section of the Law closes with a solemn warning against being rebellious and adopting pagan ways. It also contains a bright promise that God will drive out Israel’s enemies, protect his people from sickness, and grant them prosperity, if they obey the Lord’s commands (23:22).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 24 records a reaffirmation of the covenant between God and Israel, as Moses seals it with the blood of a sacrifice. In response, God appears to the leaders of the people, giving them a glimpse of his splendor. Then Moses ascends the mountain one more time to receive the stone tablets containing the commandments, as well as further instructions regarding the meeting tent (tabernacle), the priesthood, and worship.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Presence with his People (Ex 25–40)<\/h5>\n<p>After the Lord redeemed the Israelites, he told Moses, “I will make you my own special people, and I will be your God. And you will know that I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God who has rescued you from your slavery in Egypt” (6:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses had seen that wonderful promise fulfilled, yet one further step remained: “I want the people of Israel to build me a sacred residence where I can live among them” (25:8). God’s dwelling among his people is possible because God had descended to deliver the people and because they had pledged to meet his demands. God calls for a contribution from all whose hearts were willing to give, and he shows Moses a detailed pattern of the tabernacle and its furniture. Aaron and his sons are set apart to serve in the tent. Stipulations for the various offerings, including the Day of Atonement, are given. God tells Moses that he has chosen Bezalel and Oholiab to build the tabernacle and to craft its furnishings, having filled them with his Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime the Israelites, who so recently promised total obedience, grow impatient as Moses lingers for 40 days on the mountain. They demand that Aaron make an idol for them. Under pressure, Aaron complies and forms a molten calf, a representation of a pagan deity (32:4).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord informs Moses of the people’s idolatry, revelry, and immorality and says that he is angry enough to destroy all of them and start again with Moses’ offspring. Moses pleads for Israel until the Lord relents, then descends from the mountain to punish the people. Moses pleads again for forgiveness for Israel, and God in mercy pardons their terrible sin (34:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Once more God offers to make a covenant with the people (34:10). Moses spends another 40 days with the Lord, writing the commandments on tablets to replace those smashed when he saw the golden calf. When he returns to the people, his face shines from being in God’s presence, and he must keep it veiled.<\/p>\n<p>Now that Israel has been restored to God’s favor, the construction of the tabernacle can begin. The contributions are so generous that Moses must restrain the people from bringing any more. Finally, all is ready. Moses examines the tabernacle, and it is erected on the first day of the first month, nearly a year after the first Passover. The priests are consecrated, the lamps are lit, and the first burnt sacrifice is offered. A cloud descends, filling the tabernacle with the glory of the Lord. God dwells among his people, the goal of redemption has been attained, and the drama of the book of Exodus has come to an end.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Israel, History of; Moses; Plagues upon Egypt; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EXODUS, Book of Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus. Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives ...","summary_en":"EXODUS, Book of Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus. Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22709,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Biblical Concept of Law","title_en":"Biblical Concept of Law","content_ro":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalContext\">Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\n<p>Yet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, <span>niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\n<p>However, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LawintheOldTestament\">Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Torah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Synonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\n<p>These words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, <span>niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\n<p>How could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteLawandtheAncientNearEast\">Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLaws\">Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>The legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\n<p>The commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>The commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the <em>lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The <em>lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it <em>justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), <em>lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and <em>peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\n<p>God’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\n<p>By means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\n<p>The priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\n<p>The holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\n<p>The laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\n<p>The holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\n<p>Both promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposesoftheLaw\">Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\n<p>The law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\n<p>Maturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, <span>niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalContext\">Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\n<p>Yet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, <span>niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\n<p>However, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LawintheOldTestament\">Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Torah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Synonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\n<p>These words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, <span>niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\n<p>How could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteLawandtheAncientNearEast\">Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLaws\">Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>The legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\n<p>The commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>The commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the <em>lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The <em>lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it <em>justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), <em>lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and <em>peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\n<p>God’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\n<p>By means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\n<p>The priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\n<p>The holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\n<p>The laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\n<p>The holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\n<p>Both promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposesoftheLaw\">Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\n<p>The law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\n<p>Maturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, <span>niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","summary_en":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23404,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Lord","title_en":"Lord","content_ro":"<h3>LORD<\/h3>\n<p>“Lord” in English is the rendering of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘adonai<\/span> or of the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kurios<\/span><em>.<\/em> The Hebrew YHWH is usually rendered “<span>Lord<\/span>”; <em>See<\/em> Yahweh (YHWH).<\/p>\n<p>God’s rule and authority as Lord rests ultimately upon his creation and ownership of all things and people (Ps 24:1-2). God’s total supremacy over nature is emphasized by his being called the Lord over earthquakes, wind, fire (1 Kgs 19:10-14), stars (Is 40:26), beasts and sea monsters (Jb 40–41), and primeval chaos (Pss 74:12-14; 89:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets indicated that God is Lord or King of history because he directs the affairs of humans and nations (1 Kgs 19:15-18; Is 10:5-9; Am 9:7) and he is the Lord of universal morality (Ez 25–32; Am 1:3–2:16). But he is especially the Lord of Israel; his expressed will represents their civil and religious constitution and demands absolute obedience (Ex 20:2). The divine sovereignty was, however, Israel’s comfort under oppression and hope for the future, when a triumphant Day of the Lord would right its wrongs, punish its oppressors, and restore its glory (Is 2:2-4, 11-12; 34:8; Ez 30:1-5; Jl 2:31–3:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Septuagint, the regular expression for “Lord\/ lord\/master” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kurios<\/span><em>,<\/em> which in the Greek NT also is used of masters, husbands, and rulers (Mt 25:11; Lk 14:21; Acts 25:26; 1 Pt 3:6); of God (Mt 11:25; Heb 8:2); and of pagan gods (1 Cor 8:5). It is used of Jesus as a customary title of respect (“sir,” Mt 8:2; 15:25); it also retains its Septuagint associations of faith, reverence, and worship (Mt 3:3; Lk 7:13; Acts 5:14; 9:10; 1 Cor 6:13-14; Heb 2:3; Jas 5:7); it appears in phrases like “the Lord Jesus,” “the Lord’s Day,” “the Lord’s Table,” “the Spirit of the Lord” (who is also “Lord,” 2 Cor 3:17), “in the Lord,” “from the Lord,” “light in the Lord,” “boast in the Lord.” Sometimes it is not clear whether God or Christ is intended (Acts 9:31; 2 Cor 8:21). The title is attributed to Jesus himself in John 13:13-14; in John 20:28 Jesus accepts the title “My Lord and my God!”<\/p>\n<p>In the first Christian sermon Jesus’ lordship is made central to salvation (Acts 2:21). It appears that the public confession of Jesus as Lord was the approved focus and expression of Christian faith, and the basis of membership in the apostolic church (Acts 16:31; Rom 10:9; 1 Cor 12:3; Phil 2:11). Thus, it could become more a formal statement than a sincere expression of belief—hence, the warnings in Matthew 7:21 and Luke 6:46.<\/p>\n<p>From the first, such a confession was fraught with meaning. In common usage “lord” reflected the slave system and implied the absolute power exercised by the master over the purchased slave. So Paul unhesitatingly expounds the moral implications of Christian redemption (1 Cor 6:19-20; 7:22-23; <em>see<\/em> photo). To Jewish minds, the title had messianic overtones of kingship and authority (Lk 20:41-44), offending both Jews and Romans. Politically, “Lord” was a title claimed by Caesar. Therefore, it is significant that Jesus is called “King of kings and Lord of lords” during the age of Domitian when Caesar worship was mandated (Rv 17:14; 19:16).<\/p>\n\n<p>Among Greek-speaking Jews of the dispersion, familiar with the Septuagint, as among Gentiles, for whom “Lord” was the customary title for the many gods of polytheism, the application to Jesus of the epithet belonging to godhead was blasphemous, especially when associated with “Son of God,” prayer, praise, total devotion, and hope (1 Cor 8:5-6; Phil 2:9-11; 1 Thes 4:14-17). On every level, therefore, the adoring tribute given to Jesus was loaded not only with spiritual meaning but with positive and imminent danger.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; God, Being and Attributes of; God, Names of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD<\/h3>\n<p>“Lord” in English is the rendering of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘adonai<\/span> or of the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kurios<\/span><em>.<\/em> The Hebrew YHWH is usually rendered “<span>Lord<\/span>”; <em>See<\/em> Yahweh (YHWH).<\/p>\n<p>God’s rule and authority as Lord rests ultimately upon his creation and ownership of all things and people (Ps 24:1-2). God’s total supremacy over nature is emphasized by his being called the Lord over earthquakes, wind, fire (1 Kgs 19:10-14), stars (Is 40:26), beasts and sea monsters (Jb 40–41), and primeval chaos (Pss 74:12-14; 89:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets indicated that God is Lord or King of history because he directs the affairs of humans and nations (1 Kgs 19:15-18; Is 10:5-9; Am 9:7) and he is the Lord of universal morality (Ez 25–32; Am 1:3–2:16). But he is especially the Lord of Israel; his expressed will represents their civil and religious constitution and demands absolute obedience (Ex 20:2). The divine sovereignty was, however, Israel’s comfort under oppression and hope for the future, when a triumphant Day of the Lord would right its wrongs, punish its oppressors, and restore its glory (Is 2:2-4, 11-12; 34:8; Ez 30:1-5; Jl 2:31–3:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Septuagint, the regular expression for “Lord\/ lord\/master” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kurios<\/span><em>,<\/em> which in the Greek NT also is used of masters, husbands, and rulers (Mt 25:11; Lk 14:21; Acts 25:26; 1 Pt 3:6); of God (Mt 11:25; Heb 8:2); and of pagan gods (1 Cor 8:5). It is used of Jesus as a customary title of respect (“sir,” Mt 8:2; 15:25); it also retains its Septuagint associations of faith, reverence, and worship (Mt 3:3; Lk 7:13; Acts 5:14; 9:10; 1 Cor 6:13-14; Heb 2:3; Jas 5:7); it appears in phrases like “the Lord Jesus,” “the Lord’s Day,” “the Lord’s Table,” “the Spirit of the Lord” (who is also “Lord,” 2 Cor 3:17), “in the Lord,” “from the Lord,” “light in the Lord,” “boast in the Lord.” Sometimes it is not clear whether God or Christ is intended (Acts 9:31; 2 Cor 8:21). The title is attributed to Jesus himself in John 13:13-14; in John 20:28 Jesus accepts the title “My Lord and my God!”<\/p>\n<p>In the first Christian sermon Jesus’ lordship is made central to salvation (Acts 2:21). It appears that the public confession of Jesus as Lord was the approved focus and expression of Christian faith, and the basis of membership in the apostolic church (Acts 16:31; Rom 10:9; 1 Cor 12:3; Phil 2:11). Thus, it could become more a formal statement than a sincere expression of belief—hence, the warnings in Matthew 7:21 and Luke 6:46.<\/p>\n<p>From the first, such a confession was fraught with meaning. In common usage “lord” reflected the slave system and implied the absolute power exercised by the master over the purchased slave. So Paul unhesitatingly expounds the moral implications of Christian redemption (1 Cor 6:19-20; 7:22-23; <em>see<\/em> photo). To Jewish minds, the title had messianic overtones of kingship and authority (Lk 20:41-44), offending both Jews and Romans. Politically, “Lord” was a title claimed by Caesar. Therefore, it is significant that Jesus is called “King of kings and Lord of lords” during the age of Domitian when Caesar worship was mandated (Rv 17:14; 19:16).<\/p>\n\n<p>Among Greek-speaking Jews of the dispersion, familiar with the Septuagint, as among Gentiles, for whom “Lord” was the customary title for the many gods of polytheism, the application to Jesus of the epithet belonging to godhead was blasphemous, especially when associated with “Son of God,” prayer, praise, total devotion, and hope (1 Cor 8:5-6; Phil 2:9-11; 1 Thes 4:14-17). On every level, therefore, the adoring tribute given to Jesus was loaded not only with spiritual meaning but with positive and imminent danger.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; God, Being and Attributes of; God, Names of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD “Lord” in English is the rendering of the Hebrew ‘adonai or of the Greek kurios. The Hebrew YHWH is usually rendered “Lord”; See Yahweh (YHWH). God’s rule and authority as Lord rests ultimately upon his creation and ownership of all things and people (Ps 24:1-2). God’s total supremacy over nature is emphasized by his being called the Lord over earthquakes, wind, fire (1 Kgs 19:10-14), stars (Is 40:26), beasts and sea monsters (Jb 40–41), and primeval chaos (Pss 74:12-14; 89:8-10). The la...","summary_en":"LORD “Lord” in English is the rendering of the Hebrew ‘adonai or of the Greek kurios. The Hebrew YHWH is usually rendered “Lord”; See Yahweh (YHWH). God’s rule and authority as Lord rests ultimately upon his creation and ownership of all things and people (Ps 24:1-2). God’s total supremacy over nature is emphasized by his being called the Lord over earthquakes, wind, fire (1 Kgs 19:10-14), stars (Is 40:26), beasts and sea monsters (Jb 40–41), and primeval chaos (Pss 74:12-14; 89:8-10). The la...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37133,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tetragrammaton*","title_en":"Tetragrammaton*","content_ro":"<h3>TETRAGRAMMATON*<\/h3>\n<p>Term referring to the four consonants of one of the primary Hebrew names, for God (from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">tetra<\/span><em>,<\/em> “four,” and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gramma<\/span><em>,<\/em> “a letter of the alphabet”). These letters are the Hebrew equivalents of English Y (or J), H, W, and H. The most widely accepted meaning of the name is “the one who is, that is, the absolute and unchangeable one.” This is the name the Lord revealed to Moses (Ex 3:15; cf. vv 13-14; Jn 8:56-58). According to the Ten Commandments, the Jews were not to take this name in vain (Ex 20:2, 7). The Jews, therefore, regarded the name as so holy that they would not pronounce it but said instead <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> “Lord.” Originally the text was written only with consonants, but when the scholars called Masoretes added the vowel points, they inserted the vowels for Adonai as a reminder not to read the sacred name. Non-Hebraists combined the vowels of Adonai with the consonants of JHWH, producing a new form, “Jehovah,” which does not exist in the Hebrew language. The correct pronunciation of the name must have been Yahweh, but most translations render it <span>Lord<\/span>, using capital letters to distinguish it from other uses of the English word “Lord.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Names of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TETRAGRAMMATON*<\/h3>\n<p>Term referring to the four consonants of one of the primary Hebrew names, for God (from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">tetra<\/span><em>,<\/em> “four,” and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gramma<\/span><em>,<\/em> “a letter of the alphabet”). These letters are the Hebrew equivalents of English Y (or J), H, W, and H. The most widely accepted meaning of the name is “the one who is, that is, the absolute and unchangeable one.” This is the name the Lord revealed to Moses (Ex 3:15; cf. vv 13-14; Jn 8:56-58). According to the Ten Commandments, the Jews were not to take this name in vain (Ex 20:2, 7). The Jews, therefore, regarded the name as so holy that they would not pronounce it but said instead <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Adonai<\/span><em>,<\/em> “Lord.” Originally the text was written only with consonants, but when the scholars called Masoretes added the vowel points, they inserted the vowels for Adonai as a reminder not to read the sacred name. Non-Hebraists combined the vowels of Adonai with the consonants of JHWH, producing a new form, “Jehovah,” which does not exist in the Hebrew language. The correct pronunciation of the name must have been Yahweh, but most translations render it <span>Lord<\/span>, using capital letters to distinguish it from other uses of the English word “Lord.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Names of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TETRAGRAMMATON* Term referring to the four consonants of one of the primary Hebrew names, for God (from Greek tetra, “four,” and gramma, “a letter of the alphabet”). These letters are the Hebrew equivalents of English Y (or J), H, W, and H. The most widely accepted meaning of the name is “the one who is, that is, the absolute and unchangeable one.” This is the name the Lord revealed to Moses (Ex 3:15; cf. vv 13-14; Jn 8:56-58). According to the Ten Commandments, the Jews were not to take this...","summary_en":"TETRAGRAMMATON* Term referring to the four consonants of one of the primary Hebrew names, for God (from Greek tetra, “four,” and gramma, “a letter of the alphabet”). These letters are the Hebrew equivalents of English Y (or J), H, W, and H. The most widely accepted meaning of the name is “the one who is, that is, the absolute and unchangeable one.” This is the name the Lord revealed to Moses (Ex 3:15; cf. vv 13-14; Jn 8:56-58). According to the Ten Commandments, the Jews were not to take this...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43836,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:2","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:2<\/strong> This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> <em>your God<\/em> was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonstrating that he is the only God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:2<\/strong> This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> <em>your God<\/em> was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonstrating that he is the only God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:2 This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that the Lord your God was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonst...","summary_en":"20:2 This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that the Lord your God was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonst...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71462,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:2","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:2<\/strong> This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> <em>your God<\/em> was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonstrating that he is the only God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:2<\/strong> This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> <em>your God<\/em> was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonstrating that he is the only God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:2 This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that the Lord your God was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonst...","summary_en":"20:2 This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that the Lord your God was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonst...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99088,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:2","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:2<\/strong> This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> <em>your God<\/em> was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonstrating that he is the only God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:2<\/strong> This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> <em>your God<\/em> was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonstrating that he is the only God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:2 This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that the Lord your God was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonst...","summary_en":"20:2 This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that the Lord your God was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonst...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126714,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:2","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:2<\/strong> This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> <em>your God<\/em> was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonstrating that he is the only God.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:2<\/strong> This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> <em>your God<\/em> was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonstrating that he is the only God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:2 This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that the Lord your God was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonst...","summary_en":"20:2 This sentence corresponds to the preamble in the ancient covenant format. It gives the historical setting that makes such an agreement between two parties both possible and reasonable. We are told that the Lord your God was offering the covenant. It was not some unknown deity that offered this special relationship, but the God of Israel’s ancestors who had revealed his power and his care directly to them. Furthermore, that revelation was an act of gracious rescue on their behalf, demonst...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":59712,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Biblical Marriage","title_en":"Biblical Marriage","content_ro":"<h3>Biblical Marriage<\/h3>\n<p>At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not private. It is legally declared in public, with community recognition, witnesses, and accountability (see Lev 20:10-12; Deut 22:22; Jer 29:20-23).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage is also a metaphor of the Lord’s relationship with his people, first with Israel (see Exod 19:3-6; 20:2-6; 34:14; Isa 54:5; Ezek 16; Hos 2:19-20), and then with the church (see 2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:21-33). A marriage points to something greater than itself—God’s people (Christ’s “bride”) await the return of Christ (the “groom”). Married Christians are called to live in unity and dignity as they anticipate the wedding feast of the Lamb (Rev 19:6-9). Christ will live forever with his faithful people in glory (Rev 19:7; 21:2, 9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:18-25; 24:65-67; Ps 45:8-15; Isa 54:5; Hos 2:19-20; Mal 2:10-16; 1 Cor 7:1-40; 2 Cor 6:14-16; Eph 5:21-33; Heb 13:4; 1 Pet 3:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Biblical Marriage<\/h3>\n<p>At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not private. It is legally declared in public, with community recognition, witnesses, and accountability (see Lev 20:10-12; Deut 22:22; Jer 29:20-23).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage is also a metaphor of the Lord’s relationship with his people, first with Israel (see Exod 19:3-6; 20:2-6; 34:14; Isa 54:5; Ezek 16; Hos 2:19-20), and then with the church (see 2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:21-33). A marriage points to something greater than itself—God’s people (Christ’s “bride”) await the return of Christ (the “groom”). Married Christians are called to live in unity and dignity as they anticipate the wedding feast of the Lamb (Rev 19:6-9). Christ will live forever with his faithful people in glory (Rev 19:7; 21:2, 9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:18-25; 24:65-67; Ps 45:8-15; Isa 54:5; Hos 2:19-20; Mal 2:10-16; 1 Cor 7:1-40; 2 Cor 6:14-16; Eph 5:21-33; Heb 13:4; 1 Pet 3:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Biblical Marriage At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not pr...","summary_en":"Biblical Marriage At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not pr...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60209,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Hardened Hearts","title_en":"Hardened Hearts","content_ro":"<h3>Hardened Hearts<\/h3>\n<p>Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God?<\/p>\n<p>Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not allowed to repent. Although God was ultimately in control of Pharaoh, Pharaoh himself was accountable for his actions.<\/p>\n<p>This interplay between human choice and divine sovereignty is found in other places in Scripture. The Israelites hardened their hearts and refused to believe God in the wilderness (Ps 95:8-10). God hardened the hearts of the Canaanites so that they did not seek to make peace with the Hebrews (Josh 11:20). The message God gave to Isaiah hardened the hearts of his hearers (Isa 6:9-10); similarly in the New Testament, many people hardened their hearts in response to the message of the gospel (Matt 13:15; John 12:40; Acts 28:27). People are responsible for their choices, but no one makes choices in a vacuum. Rather, they make them in the context of how God has made his world and providentially directs it.<\/p>\n<p>The emphasis in Exodus on God’s control of Pharaoh puts the conflict between two belief systems into stark contrast. Pharaoh believed that he was sovereign and divine, able to do whatever he pleased. God demonstrated that this was not the case: Pharaoh was dependent, as much the prisoner of his choices as any other creature on the planet. There is only one absolutely independent “<span>I Am<\/span>,” and that is Yahweh, the <span>Lord<\/span> (see 3:6-14; 6:2-8; 20:2; 34:6-7; Isa 45:3-7; 48:17; Mark 14:62; John 8:23-28).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:21; Exod 3:19; 4:21; 8:15, 19, 32; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8; Josh 11:19-20; 2 Chr 36:11-13; Ps 95:8-11; Isa 6:9-10; Ezek 11:18-21; 36:22-27; Matt 12:34-35; 13:10-17; Luke 8:4-15; John 12:37-40; Acts 28:23-28; Rom 2:14-16; 11:7-12; 2 Cor 3:13-18; Eph 4:17-24; Heb 3:6-19; 6:4-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hardened Hearts<\/h3>\n<p>Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God?<\/p>\n<p>Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not allowed to repent. Although God was ultimately in control of Pharaoh, Pharaoh himself was accountable for his actions.<\/p>\n<p>This interplay between human choice and divine sovereignty is found in other places in Scripture. The Israelites hardened their hearts and refused to believe God in the wilderness (Ps 95:8-10). God hardened the hearts of the Canaanites so that they did not seek to make peace with the Hebrews (Josh 11:20). The message God gave to Isaiah hardened the hearts of his hearers (Isa 6:9-10); similarly in the New Testament, many people hardened their hearts in response to the message of the gospel (Matt 13:15; John 12:40; Acts 28:27). People are responsible for their choices, but no one makes choices in a vacuum. Rather, they make them in the context of how God has made his world and providentially directs it.<\/p>\n<p>The emphasis in Exodus on God’s control of Pharaoh puts the conflict between two belief systems into stark contrast. Pharaoh believed that he was sovereign and divine, able to do whatever he pleased. God demonstrated that this was not the case: Pharaoh was dependent, as much the prisoner of his choices as any other creature on the planet. There is only one absolutely independent “<span>I Am<\/span>,” and that is Yahweh, the <span>Lord<\/span> (see 3:6-14; 6:2-8; 20:2; 34:6-7; Isa 45:3-7; 48:17; Mark 14:62; John 8:23-28).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:21; Exod 3:19; 4:21; 8:15, 19, 32; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8; Josh 11:19-20; 2 Chr 36:11-13; Ps 95:8-11; Isa 6:9-10; Ezek 11:18-21; 36:22-27; Matt 12:34-35; 13:10-17; Luke 8:4-15; John 12:37-40; Acts 28:23-28; Rom 2:14-16; 11:7-12; 2 Cor 3:13-18; Eph 4:17-24; Heb 3:6-19; 6:4-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hardened Hearts Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God? Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not...","summary_en":"Hardened Hearts Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God? Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60350,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64125,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64152,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Uniqueness","title_en":"God’s Uniqueness","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Uniqueness<\/h3>\n<p>As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power.<\/p>\n<p>The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often identified with elements of the natural world. These nature deities and their images were false, lifeless, and immobile (see Jer 10:1-5). They could not communicate with people or relate to individuals. They could not even move about by their own power, because they had no power. Unfortunately, God’s people often followed the idolatrous practices of their neighbors, leading the prophets to remind the people of God’s uniqueness.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to lifeless idols, the one, true, living God relates to his specially made humans on a personal basis, despite his otherness. He reaches into the lives of individuals and reveals his will so that each person can understand his desires and respond to him. The Lord, who created all things, strikingly seeks an individual relationship with his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:4; Exod 15:11; 20:2-6; Deut 4:32-39; 33:26; Job 38:1–41:34; Pss 86:8; 115:4-7; 139:1-18; Isa 42:8; 44:9-20; Jer 10:1-16; 14:22; Amos 4:13; 5:8-9; Rev 15:3-4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Uniqueness<\/h3>\n<p>As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power.<\/p>\n<p>The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often identified with elements of the natural world. These nature deities and their images were false, lifeless, and immobile (see Jer 10:1-5). They could not communicate with people or relate to individuals. They could not even move about by their own power, because they had no power. Unfortunately, God’s people often followed the idolatrous practices of their neighbors, leading the prophets to remind the people of God’s uniqueness.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to lifeless idols, the one, true, living God relates to his specially made humans on a personal basis, despite his otherness. He reaches into the lives of individuals and reveals his will so that each person can understand his desires and respond to him. The Lord, who created all things, strikingly seeks an individual relationship with his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:4; Exod 15:11; 20:2-6; Deut 4:32-39; 33:26; Job 38:1–41:34; Pss 86:8; 115:4-7; 139:1-18; Isa 42:8; 44:9-20; Jer 10:1-16; 14:22; Amos 4:13; 5:8-9; Rev 15:3-4<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Uniqueness As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power. The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often ident...","summary_en":"God’s Uniqueness As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power. The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often ident...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87338,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Biblical Marriage","title_en":"Biblical Marriage","content_ro":"<h3>Biblical Marriage<\/h3>\n<p>At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not private. It is legally declared in public, with community recognition, witnesses, and accountability (see Lev 20:10-12; Deut 22:22; Jer 29:20-23).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage is also a metaphor of the Lord’s relationship with his people, first with Israel (see Exod 19:3-6; 20:2-6; 34:14; Isa 54:5; Ezek 16; Hos 2:19-20), and then with the church (see 2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:21-33). A marriage points to something greater than itself—God’s people (Christ’s “bride”) await the return of Christ (the “groom”). Married Christians are called to live in unity and dignity as they anticipate the wedding feast of the Lamb (Rev 19:6-9). Christ will live forever with his faithful people in glory (Rev 19:7; 21:2, 9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:18-25; 24:65-67; Ps 45:8-15; Isa 54:5; Hos 2:19-20; Mal 2:10-16; 1 Cor 7:1-40; 2 Cor 6:14-16; Eph 5:21-33; Heb 13:4; 1 Pet 3:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Biblical Marriage<\/h3>\n<p>At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not private. It is legally declared in public, with community recognition, witnesses, and accountability (see Lev 20:10-12; Deut 22:22; Jer 29:20-23).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage is also a metaphor of the Lord’s relationship with his people, first with Israel (see Exod 19:3-6; 20:2-6; 34:14; Isa 54:5; Ezek 16; Hos 2:19-20), and then with the church (see 2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:21-33). A marriage points to something greater than itself—God’s people (Christ’s “bride”) await the return of Christ (the “groom”). Married Christians are called to live in unity and dignity as they anticipate the wedding feast of the Lamb (Rev 19:6-9). Christ will live forever with his faithful people in glory (Rev 19:7; 21:2, 9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:18-25; 24:65-67; Ps 45:8-15; Isa 54:5; Hos 2:19-20; Mal 2:10-16; 1 Cor 7:1-40; 2 Cor 6:14-16; Eph 5:21-33; Heb 13:4; 1 Pet 3:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Biblical Marriage At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not pr...","summary_en":"Biblical Marriage At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not pr...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87835,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Hardened Hearts","title_en":"Hardened Hearts","content_ro":"<h3>Hardened Hearts<\/h3>\n<p>Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God?<\/p>\n<p>Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not allowed to repent. Although God was ultimately in control of Pharaoh, Pharaoh himself was accountable for his actions.<\/p>\n<p>This interplay between human choice and divine sovereignty is found in other places in Scripture. The Israelites hardened their hearts and refused to believe God in the wilderness (Ps 95:8-10). God hardened the hearts of the Canaanites so that they did not seek to make peace with the Hebrews (Josh 11:20). The message God gave to Isaiah hardened the hearts of his hearers (Isa 6:9-10); similarly in the New Testament, many people hardened their hearts in response to the message of the gospel (Matt 13:15; John 12:40; Acts 28:27). People are responsible for their choices, but no one makes choices in a vacuum. Rather, they make them in the context of how God has made his world and providentially directs it.<\/p>\n<p>The emphasis in Exodus on God’s control of Pharaoh puts the conflict between two belief systems into stark contrast. Pharaoh believed that he was sovereign and divine, able to do whatever he pleased. God demonstrated that this was not the case: Pharaoh was dependent, as much the prisoner of his choices as any other creature on the planet. There is only one absolutely independent “<span>I Am<\/span>,” and that is Yahweh, the <span>Lord<\/span> (see 3:6-14; 6:2-8; 20:2; 34:6-7; Isa 45:3-7; 48:17; Mark 14:62; John 8:23-28).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:21; Exod 3:19; 4:21; 8:15, 19, 32; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8; Josh 11:19-20; 2 Chr 36:11-13; Ps 95:8-11; Isa 6:9-10; Ezek 11:18-21; 36:22-27; Matt 12:34-35; 13:10-17; Luke 8:4-15; John 12:37-40; Acts 28:23-28; Rom 2:14-16; 11:7-12; 2 Cor 3:13-18; Eph 4:17-24; Heb 3:6-19; 6:4-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hardened Hearts<\/h3>\n<p>Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God?<\/p>\n<p>Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not allowed to repent. Although God was ultimately in control of Pharaoh, Pharaoh himself was accountable for his actions.<\/p>\n<p>This interplay between human choice and divine sovereignty is found in other places in Scripture. The Israelites hardened their hearts and refused to believe God in the wilderness (Ps 95:8-10). God hardened the hearts of the Canaanites so that they did not seek to make peace with the Hebrews (Josh 11:20). The message God gave to Isaiah hardened the hearts of his hearers (Isa 6:9-10); similarly in the New Testament, many people hardened their hearts in response to the message of the gospel (Matt 13:15; John 12:40; Acts 28:27). People are responsible for their choices, but no one makes choices in a vacuum. Rather, they make them in the context of how God has made his world and providentially directs it.<\/p>\n<p>The emphasis in Exodus on God’s control of Pharaoh puts the conflict between two belief systems into stark contrast. Pharaoh believed that he was sovereign and divine, able to do whatever he pleased. God demonstrated that this was not the case: Pharaoh was dependent, as much the prisoner of his choices as any other creature on the planet. There is only one absolutely independent “<span>I Am<\/span>,” and that is Yahweh, the <span>Lord<\/span> (see 3:6-14; 6:2-8; 20:2; 34:6-7; Isa 45:3-7; 48:17; Mark 14:62; John 8:23-28).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:21; Exod 3:19; 4:21; 8:15, 19, 32; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8; Josh 11:19-20; 2 Chr 36:11-13; Ps 95:8-11; Isa 6:9-10; Ezek 11:18-21; 36:22-27; Matt 12:34-35; 13:10-17; Luke 8:4-15; John 12:37-40; Acts 28:23-28; Rom 2:14-16; 11:7-12; 2 Cor 3:13-18; Eph 4:17-24; Heb 3:6-19; 6:4-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hardened Hearts Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God? Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not...","summary_en":"Hardened Hearts Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God? Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87976,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91751,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91778,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Uniqueness","title_en":"God’s Uniqueness","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Uniqueness<\/h3>\n<p>As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power.<\/p>\n<p>The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often identified with elements of the natural world. These nature deities and their images were false, lifeless, and immobile (see Jer 10:1-5). They could not communicate with people or relate to individuals. They could not even move about by their own power, because they had no power. Unfortunately, God’s people often followed the idolatrous practices of their neighbors, leading the prophets to remind the people of God’s uniqueness.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to lifeless idols, the one, true, living God relates to his specially made humans on a personal basis, despite his otherness. He reaches into the lives of individuals and reveals his will so that each person can understand his desires and respond to him. The Lord, who created all things, strikingly seeks an individual relationship with his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:4; Exod 15:11; 20:2-6; Deut 4:32-39; 33:26; Job 38:1–41:34; Pss 86:8; 115:4-7; 139:1-18; Isa 42:8; 44:9-20; Jer 10:1-16; 14:22; Amos 4:13; 5:8-9; Rev 15:3-4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Uniqueness<\/h3>\n<p>As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power.<\/p>\n<p>The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often identified with elements of the natural world. These nature deities and their images were false, lifeless, and immobile (see Jer 10:1-5). They could not communicate with people or relate to individuals. They could not even move about by their own power, because they had no power. Unfortunately, God’s people often followed the idolatrous practices of their neighbors, leading the prophets to remind the people of God’s uniqueness.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to lifeless idols, the one, true, living God relates to his specially made humans on a personal basis, despite his otherness. He reaches into the lives of individuals and reveals his will so that each person can understand his desires and respond to him. The Lord, who created all things, strikingly seeks an individual relationship with his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:4; Exod 15:11; 20:2-6; Deut 4:32-39; 33:26; Job 38:1–41:34; Pss 86:8; 115:4-7; 139:1-18; Isa 42:8; 44:9-20; Jer 10:1-16; 14:22; Amos 4:13; 5:8-9; Rev 15:3-4<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Uniqueness As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power. The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often ident...","summary_en":"God’s Uniqueness As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power. The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often ident...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":114964,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Biblical Marriage","title_en":"Biblical Marriage","content_ro":"<h3>Biblical Marriage<\/h3>\n<p>At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not private. It is legally declared in public, with community recognition, witnesses, and accountability (see Lev 20:10-12; Deut 22:22; Jer 29:20-23).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage is also a metaphor of the Lord’s relationship with his people, first with Israel (see Exod 19:3-6; 20:2-6; 34:14; Isa 54:5; Ezek 16; Hos 2:19-20), and then with the church (see 2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:21-33). A marriage points to something greater than itself—God’s people (Christ’s “bride”) await the return of Christ (the “groom”). Married Christians are called to live in unity and dignity as they anticipate the wedding feast of the Lamb (Rev 19:6-9). Christ will live forever with his faithful people in glory (Rev 19:7; 21:2, 9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:18-25; 24:65-67; Ps 45:8-15; Isa 54:5; Hos 2:19-20; Mal 2:10-16; 1 Cor 7:1-40; 2 Cor 6:14-16; Eph 5:21-33; Heb 13:4; 1 Pet 3:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Biblical Marriage<\/h3>\n<p>At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not private. It is legally declared in public, with community recognition, witnesses, and accountability (see Lev 20:10-12; Deut 22:22; Jer 29:20-23).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage is also a metaphor of the Lord’s relationship with his people, first with Israel (see Exod 19:3-6; 20:2-6; 34:14; Isa 54:5; Ezek 16; Hos 2:19-20), and then with the church (see 2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:21-33). A marriage points to something greater than itself—God’s people (Christ’s “bride”) await the return of Christ (the “groom”). Married Christians are called to live in unity and dignity as they anticipate the wedding feast of the Lamb (Rev 19:6-9). Christ will live forever with his faithful people in glory (Rev 19:7; 21:2, 9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:18-25; 24:65-67; Ps 45:8-15; Isa 54:5; Hos 2:19-20; Mal 2:10-16; 1 Cor 7:1-40; 2 Cor 6:14-16; Eph 5:21-33; Heb 13:4; 1 Pet 3:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Biblical Marriage At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not pr...","summary_en":"Biblical Marriage At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not pr...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115461,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Hardened Hearts","title_en":"Hardened Hearts","content_ro":"<h3>Hardened Hearts<\/h3>\n<p>Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God?<\/p>\n<p>Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not allowed to repent. Although God was ultimately in control of Pharaoh, Pharaoh himself was accountable for his actions.<\/p>\n<p>This interplay between human choice and divine sovereignty is found in other places in Scripture. The Israelites hardened their hearts and refused to believe God in the wilderness (Ps 95:8-10). God hardened the hearts of the Canaanites so that they did not seek to make peace with the Hebrews (Josh 11:20). The message God gave to Isaiah hardened the hearts of his hearers (Isa 6:9-10); similarly in the New Testament, many people hardened their hearts in response to the message of the gospel (Matt 13:15; John 12:40; Acts 28:27). People are responsible for their choices, but no one makes choices in a vacuum. Rather, they make them in the context of how God has made his world and providentially directs it.<\/p>\n<p>The emphasis in Exodus on God’s control of Pharaoh puts the conflict between two belief systems into stark contrast. Pharaoh believed that he was sovereign and divine, able to do whatever he pleased. God demonstrated that this was not the case: Pharaoh was dependent, as much the prisoner of his choices as any other creature on the planet. There is only one absolutely independent “<span>I Am<\/span>,” and that is Yahweh, the <span>Lord<\/span> (see 3:6-14; 6:2-8; 20:2; 34:6-7; Isa 45:3-7; 48:17; Mark 14:62; John 8:23-28).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:21; Exod 3:19; 4:21; 8:15, 19, 32; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8; Josh 11:19-20; 2 Chr 36:11-13; Ps 95:8-11; Isa 6:9-10; Ezek 11:18-21; 36:22-27; Matt 12:34-35; 13:10-17; Luke 8:4-15; John 12:37-40; Acts 28:23-28; Rom 2:14-16; 11:7-12; 2 Cor 3:13-18; Eph 4:17-24; Heb 3:6-19; 6:4-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hardened Hearts<\/h3>\n<p>Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God?<\/p>\n<p>Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not allowed to repent. Although God was ultimately in control of Pharaoh, Pharaoh himself was accountable for his actions.<\/p>\n<p>This interplay between human choice and divine sovereignty is found in other places in Scripture. The Israelites hardened their hearts and refused to believe God in the wilderness (Ps 95:8-10). God hardened the hearts of the Canaanites so that they did not seek to make peace with the Hebrews (Josh 11:20). The message God gave to Isaiah hardened the hearts of his hearers (Isa 6:9-10); similarly in the New Testament, many people hardened their hearts in response to the message of the gospel (Matt 13:15; John 12:40; Acts 28:27). People are responsible for their choices, but no one makes choices in a vacuum. Rather, they make them in the context of how God has made his world and providentially directs it.<\/p>\n<p>The emphasis in Exodus on God’s control of Pharaoh puts the conflict between two belief systems into stark contrast. Pharaoh believed that he was sovereign and divine, able to do whatever he pleased. God demonstrated that this was not the case: Pharaoh was dependent, as much the prisoner of his choices as any other creature on the planet. There is only one absolutely independent “<span>I Am<\/span>,” and that is Yahweh, the <span>Lord<\/span> (see 3:6-14; 6:2-8; 20:2; 34:6-7; Isa 45:3-7; 48:17; Mark 14:62; John 8:23-28).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:21; Exod 3:19; 4:21; 8:15, 19, 32; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8; Josh 11:19-20; 2 Chr 36:11-13; Ps 95:8-11; Isa 6:9-10; Ezek 11:18-21; 36:22-27; Matt 12:34-35; 13:10-17; Luke 8:4-15; John 12:37-40; Acts 28:23-28; Rom 2:14-16; 11:7-12; 2 Cor 3:13-18; Eph 4:17-24; Heb 3:6-19; 6:4-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hardened Hearts Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God? Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not...","summary_en":"Hardened Hearts Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God? Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115602,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119377,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119404,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Uniqueness","title_en":"God’s Uniqueness","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Uniqueness<\/h3>\n<p>As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power.<\/p>\n<p>The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often identified with elements of the natural world. These nature deities and their images were false, lifeless, and immobile (see Jer 10:1-5). They could not communicate with people or relate to individuals. They could not even move about by their own power, because they had no power. Unfortunately, God’s people often followed the idolatrous practices of their neighbors, leading the prophets to remind the people of God’s uniqueness.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to lifeless idols, the one, true, living God relates to his specially made humans on a personal basis, despite his otherness. He reaches into the lives of individuals and reveals his will so that each person can understand his desires and respond to him. The Lord, who created all things, strikingly seeks an individual relationship with his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:4; Exod 15:11; 20:2-6; Deut 4:32-39; 33:26; Job 38:1–41:34; Pss 86:8; 115:4-7; 139:1-18; Isa 42:8; 44:9-20; Jer 10:1-16; 14:22; Amos 4:13; 5:8-9; Rev 15:3-4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Uniqueness<\/h3>\n<p>As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power.<\/p>\n<p>The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often identified with elements of the natural world. These nature deities and their images were false, lifeless, and immobile (see Jer 10:1-5). They could not communicate with people or relate to individuals. They could not even move about by their own power, because they had no power. Unfortunately, God’s people often followed the idolatrous practices of their neighbors, leading the prophets to remind the people of God’s uniqueness.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to lifeless idols, the one, true, living God relates to his specially made humans on a personal basis, despite his otherness. He reaches into the lives of individuals and reveals his will so that each person can understand his desires and respond to him. The Lord, who created all things, strikingly seeks an individual relationship with his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:4; Exod 15:11; 20:2-6; Deut 4:32-39; 33:26; Job 38:1–41:34; Pss 86:8; 115:4-7; 139:1-18; Isa 42:8; 44:9-20; Jer 10:1-16; 14:22; Amos 4:13; 5:8-9; Rev 15:3-4<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Uniqueness As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power. The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often ident...","summary_en":"God’s Uniqueness As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power. The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often ident...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":142590,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Biblical Marriage","title_en":"Biblical Marriage","content_ro":"<h3>Biblical Marriage<\/h3>\n<p>At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not private. It is legally declared in public, with community recognition, witnesses, and accountability (see Lev 20:10-12; Deut 22:22; Jer 29:20-23).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage is also a metaphor of the Lord’s relationship with his people, first with Israel (see Exod 19:3-6; 20:2-6; 34:14; Isa 54:5; Ezek 16; Hos 2:19-20), and then with the church (see 2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:21-33). A marriage points to something greater than itself—God’s people (Christ’s “bride”) await the return of Christ (the “groom”). Married Christians are called to live in unity and dignity as they anticipate the wedding feast of the Lamb (Rev 19:6-9). Christ will live forever with his faithful people in glory (Rev 19:7; 21:2, 9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:18-25; 24:65-67; Ps 45:8-15; Isa 54:5; Hos 2:19-20; Mal 2:10-16; 1 Cor 7:1-40; 2 Cor 6:14-16; Eph 5:21-33; Heb 13:4; 1 Pet 3:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Biblical Marriage<\/h3>\n<p>At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not private. It is legally declared in public, with community recognition, witnesses, and accountability (see Lev 20:10-12; Deut 22:22; Jer 29:20-23).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage is also a metaphor of the Lord’s relationship with his people, first with Israel (see Exod 19:3-6; 20:2-6; 34:14; Isa 54:5; Ezek 16; Hos 2:19-20), and then with the church (see 2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:21-33). A marriage points to something greater than itself—God’s people (Christ’s “bride”) await the return of Christ (the “groom”). Married Christians are called to live in unity and dignity as they anticipate the wedding feast of the Lamb (Rev 19:6-9). Christ will live forever with his faithful people in glory (Rev 19:7; 21:2, 9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:18-25; 24:65-67; Ps 45:8-15; Isa 54:5; Hos 2:19-20; Mal 2:10-16; 1 Cor 7:1-40; 2 Cor 6:14-16; Eph 5:21-33; Heb 13:4; 1 Pet 3:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Biblical Marriage At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not pr...","summary_en":"Biblical Marriage At the first wedding, God the Father gave the bride away to the groom and witnessed the couple’s interaction in his sanctuary-garden (Gen 2:18-25). Biblical marriage is a binding covenant commitment before God. Breaching that covenant (e.g., through adultery) is a sin against people and against God, who is a divine witness to and guarantor of the marriage covenant (see Mal 2:10-16; cp. Gen 39:6-9; Jer 3:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Heb 13:4). Although marriage is exclusive, it is not pr...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143087,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Hardened Hearts","title_en":"Hardened Hearts","content_ro":"<h3>Hardened Hearts<\/h3>\n<p>Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God?<\/p>\n<p>Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not allowed to repent. Although God was ultimately in control of Pharaoh, Pharaoh himself was accountable for his actions.<\/p>\n<p>This interplay between human choice and divine sovereignty is found in other places in Scripture. The Israelites hardened their hearts and refused to believe God in the wilderness (Ps 95:8-10). God hardened the hearts of the Canaanites so that they did not seek to make peace with the Hebrews (Josh 11:20). The message God gave to Isaiah hardened the hearts of his hearers (Isa 6:9-10); similarly in the New Testament, many people hardened their hearts in response to the message of the gospel (Matt 13:15; John 12:40; Acts 28:27). People are responsible for their choices, but no one makes choices in a vacuum. Rather, they make them in the context of how God has made his world and providentially directs it.<\/p>\n<p>The emphasis in Exodus on God’s control of Pharaoh puts the conflict between two belief systems into stark contrast. Pharaoh believed that he was sovereign and divine, able to do whatever he pleased. God demonstrated that this was not the case: Pharaoh was dependent, as much the prisoner of his choices as any other creature on the planet. There is only one absolutely independent “<span>I Am<\/span>,” and that is Yahweh, the <span>Lord<\/span> (see 3:6-14; 6:2-8; 20:2; 34:6-7; Isa 45:3-7; 48:17; Mark 14:62; John 8:23-28).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:21; Exod 3:19; 4:21; 8:15, 19, 32; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8; Josh 11:19-20; 2 Chr 36:11-13; Ps 95:8-11; Isa 6:9-10; Ezek 11:18-21; 36:22-27; Matt 12:34-35; 13:10-17; Luke 8:4-15; John 12:37-40; Acts 28:23-28; Rom 2:14-16; 11:7-12; 2 Cor 3:13-18; Eph 4:17-24; Heb 3:6-19; 6:4-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hardened Hearts<\/h3>\n<p>Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God?<\/p>\n<p>Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not allowed to repent. Although God was ultimately in control of Pharaoh, Pharaoh himself was accountable for his actions.<\/p>\n<p>This interplay between human choice and divine sovereignty is found in other places in Scripture. The Israelites hardened their hearts and refused to believe God in the wilderness (Ps 95:8-10). God hardened the hearts of the Canaanites so that they did not seek to make peace with the Hebrews (Josh 11:20). The message God gave to Isaiah hardened the hearts of his hearers (Isa 6:9-10); similarly in the New Testament, many people hardened their hearts in response to the message of the gospel (Matt 13:15; John 12:40; Acts 28:27). People are responsible for their choices, but no one makes choices in a vacuum. Rather, they make them in the context of how God has made his world and providentially directs it.<\/p>\n<p>The emphasis in Exodus on God’s control of Pharaoh puts the conflict between two belief systems into stark contrast. Pharaoh believed that he was sovereign and divine, able to do whatever he pleased. God demonstrated that this was not the case: Pharaoh was dependent, as much the prisoner of his choices as any other creature on the planet. There is only one absolutely independent “<span>I Am<\/span>,” and that is Yahweh, the <span>Lord<\/span> (see 3:6-14; 6:2-8; 20:2; 34:6-7; Isa 45:3-7; 48:17; Mark 14:62; John 8:23-28).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:21; Exod 3:19; 4:21; 8:15, 19, 32; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8; Josh 11:19-20; 2 Chr 36:11-13; Ps 95:8-11; Isa 6:9-10; Ezek 11:18-21; 36:22-27; Matt 12:34-35; 13:10-17; Luke 8:4-15; John 12:37-40; Acts 28:23-28; Rom 2:14-16; 11:7-12; 2 Cor 3:13-18; Eph 4:17-24; Heb 3:6-19; 6:4-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hardened Hearts Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God? Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not...","summary_en":"Hardened Hearts Exodus repeatedly states that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exod 4:21; 9:12; 10:1, 20; 11:10; 14:4, 8). These statements can be troubling. Was Pharaoh forced to sin against God? Other factors need to be taken into account: (1) The Lord knew ahead of time that Pharaoh would harden his heart (3:19); (2) Pharaoh himself became stubborn (8:15, 32); and (3) Pharaoh remained stubborn despite clear warnings (8:19). Pharaoh was not a well-meaning, misguided individual who was not...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143228,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147003,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147030,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Uniqueness","title_en":"God’s Uniqueness","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Uniqueness<\/h3>\n<p>As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power.<\/p>\n<p>The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often identified with elements of the natural world. These nature deities and their images were false, lifeless, and immobile (see Jer 10:1-5). They could not communicate with people or relate to individuals. They could not even move about by their own power, because they had no power. Unfortunately, God’s people often followed the idolatrous practices of their neighbors, leading the prophets to remind the people of God’s uniqueness.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to lifeless idols, the one, true, living God relates to his specially made humans on a personal basis, despite his otherness. He reaches into the lives of individuals and reveals his will so that each person can understand his desires and respond to him. The Lord, who created all things, strikingly seeks an individual relationship with his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:4; Exod 15:11; 20:2-6; Deut 4:32-39; 33:26; Job 38:1–41:34; Pss 86:8; 115:4-7; 139:1-18; Isa 42:8; 44:9-20; Jer 10:1-16; 14:22; Amos 4:13; 5:8-9; Rev 15:3-4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Uniqueness<\/h3>\n<p>As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power.<\/p>\n<p>The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often identified with elements of the natural world. These nature deities and their images were false, lifeless, and immobile (see Jer 10:1-5). They could not communicate with people or relate to individuals. They could not even move about by their own power, because they had no power. Unfortunately, God’s people often followed the idolatrous practices of their neighbors, leading the prophets to remind the people of God’s uniqueness.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to lifeless idols, the one, true, living God relates to his specially made humans on a personal basis, despite his otherness. He reaches into the lives of individuals and reveals his will so that each person can understand his desires and respond to him. The Lord, who created all things, strikingly seeks an individual relationship with his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:1–2:4; Exod 15:11; 20:2-6; Deut 4:32-39; 33:26; Job 38:1–41:34; Pss 86:8; 115:4-7; 139:1-18; Isa 42:8; 44:9-20; Jer 10:1-16; 14:22; Amos 4:13; 5:8-9; Rev 15:3-4<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Uniqueness As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power. The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often ident...","summary_en":"God’s Uniqueness As Creator, God stands wholly apart from the things he has created. God is not part of nature; he created and rules nature. He has always existed as the living God, the intelligent Designer who decreed that the universe should function according to his laws. He gave life to all living beings. As God, he is present everywhere and knows all things. He is the living God of love, holiness, justice, and power. The nations around Israel worshiped numerous gods, who were often ident...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":7277,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandments, the Ten","title_en":"Commandments, the Ten","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9445,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Deuteronomy","title_en":"Book of Deuteronomy","content_ro":"<h3>DEUTERONOMY, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for the nation of Israel. Moses’ reminders of the wilderness wanderings and the Ten Commandments, plus his instructions for life in the Promised Land, are a vital part of the OT covenant literature.<\/p>\n\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>• Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>• Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandAuthorship\">Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>Two basic views (with variations) on the date and authorship of Deuteronomy are advocated by modern biblical scholars. Those who consider Moses the author date the book in the 14th or 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. Others believe that it was composed by an unknown author in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>, when Josiah was king in the southern kingdom of Judah.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for a Seventh-Century Date<\/h5>\n<p>As early as 1805, W. M. L. de Wette advocated that Deuteronomy was used by Josiah in his seventh-century reforms, and that it was written shortly before that. Biblical critic Julius Wellhausen adopted that view, which has been advocated by many scholars ever since S. R. Driver publicized it in his <em>Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament<\/em> (1891). According to that view, the book was written late but ascribed to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>Many modern scholars, such as Gerhard von Rad and G. E. Wright, regard Moses as the founder of Israel’s faith. They argue that whatever in Deuteronomy is from Moses was transmitted orally until about the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. Denying that Moses actually wrote Deuteronomy, they attribute its present form to numerous writers and editors over an extended period of centuries.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for Mosaic Authorship<\/h5>\n<p>In recent decades, studies of Hittite suzerainty treaties from the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> have yielded interesting comparisons between those treaty forms and the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. In 1954 G. Mendenhall suggested that the form of the covenant at Mt Sinai was the same literary form used by Hittites in treaties with Syrian vassal states during the 14th and 13th centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In 1960 M. G. Kline applied that idea to the book of Deuteronomy, seeing it as a renewal of the Sinaitic covenant and outlining its structure as a literary unit reflecting the pattern of Hittite covenant forms.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy does contain certain parallels to Hittite vassal treaties. As a renewal treaty it appeals to the covenant of God with Israel at Mt Sinai, recorded in the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>1. The “preamble” in ancient Hittite treaties usually identified the suzerain or ruler. In Deuteronomy 1:1-5 (Ex 20:1) Moses as the speaker represents God, the King of Israel. As his death approaches, Moses makes an appeal for the renewal of the covenant.<\/p>\n<li>2. In the “historical prologue” the suzerain usually cited the benefits he had bestowed on his vassal. In Deuteronomy 1:6–4:49 (Ex 20:2) Moses declares what God has done for Israel since his revelation at Mt Sinai. Moses reminds the people of Israel of God’s faithfulness even when they had been unfaithful.<\/li>\n<li>3. The “stipulations” were usually stated by the suzerain in the treaty’s third division. In Deuteronomy 5–26 Moses outlines the stipulations for Israel in their covenant relationship to God. The basic requirement in Deuteronomy 5–11 (Ex 20:3-17) is exclusive, wholehearted love for God. In the following chapters, Deuteronomy 12–26, the basic principle of exclusive love for God is applied to specific areas of culticceremonial consecration (Dt 12:1–16:17), judicial justice in government (16:18–21:23), the sanctity of God’s order (chs 22–25), and public acknowledgment of God as their Redeemer and King (ch 26).<\/li>\n<li>4. “Covenant ratification” usually contained a provision for treaty renewal and a formula for curses and blessings. In Deuteronomy 27 provision is made for Joshua to conclude the renewal of the covenant after the Israelites occupy the land. In addition, the divine threat and promise are expressed in blessings and curses as Israel swears its oath of allegiance on the plains of Moab.<\/li>\n<li>5. “Succession arrangements” were usually the concluding part of suzerainty-vassal treaties. In chapters 31–34 Joshua is designated as Moses’ successor. The written text is deposited in the sanctuary with the song of witness and a testamentary blessing by Moses. The book of Deuteronomy thus constitutes the documentary witness of God’s covenant as it concludes with the death of Moses.<\/li>\n<p>The fact that the literary structure of Deuteronomy parallels the legal forms characteristic of ancient Hittite treaties supports the traditional viewpoint that Moses is the author of Deuteronomy. When Moses is recognized as the mediator between God and Israel in the Sinaitic covenant, it is significant that the book of Deuteronomy represents Moses’ renewal of the covenant in the literary form current in the culture of his day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalSetting\">Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>Moses led the Israelites from Egypt through the wilderness to the plains of Moab east of the Dead Sea. Exodus 1–19 gives an account of the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt, the birth and preparation of Moses, his contest with the pharaoh, the miraculous deliverance out of Egypt, and the journey to Mt Sinai (probably also known as Mt Horeb).<\/p>\n<p>In that desert area God’s great revelation came to Israel through Moses (Ex 20–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 1–9). At Mt Sinai, God identified himself as the one who had delivered the Israelites. There he established an agreement by which they would be exclusively devoted to him as his holy nation. There the tabernacle was built and the priesthood established. Instructions were given for making sacrifices and offerings, and for observing feasts and seasons, so that Israel’s pattern of living would show that they were God’s holy people. The tribes were also organized for encampment around the tabernacle and for the march to Canaan, the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 10–21 is an account of the 38 years the Israelites spent in the wilderness. In 11 days they marched from Mt Horeb to Kadesh-barnea, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Beersheba. From there 12 spies were sent into Canaan. Their report produced a crisis in the form of a revolt against God. Subsequently, Israel wandered in the wilderness for 38 years, during which those who had been at least 20 years old when they left Egypt died. The new generation moved to the plains of Moab, located east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. Numbers 20–36 tells of the conquest and occupation of the land east of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy presents Moses’ address to the new generation of Israelites. In Exodus and Numbers God frequently speaks to Moses; in Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking at God’s command to the Israelites (Dt 1:1-4; 5:1; 29:1). In contrast to the preceding books, Deuteronomy has a style of exhortation in which Moses admonishes the new generation about their responsibility in view of the preceding generation’s failures. Whatever repetition occurs in Deuteronomy is carefully selected, with the specific purpose of warning the new generation so that they will not fail to conquer and occupy Canaan. Deuteronomy is not primarily retrospective; its outlook is optimistic about the future, offering hope for fulfilling the promises God made to the Israelites in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificanceofDeuteronomy\">Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>Deuteronomy (with Genesis, Psalms, and Isaiah) is among the most frequently quoted books in the early Christian centuries. More than 80 OT quotations in the NT come from Deuteronomy.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus focused attention on Deuteronomy when he summarized the essence of the entire OT Law and Prophets in the two great commandments of love for God and neighbor (Mt 22:37; see Dt 6:5; 10:19). Jesus also quoted Deuteronomy (6:13, 16; 8:3) in his temptation experience (Mt 4:4-10). Deuteronomy unfolds the essence of what God revealed to Moses at Mt Sinai. In Deuteronomy, Moses shares with the Israelites the core of God’s revelation without repeating details of sacrifices, observances, or rituals. He expounds the character of Israel’s faith and nationhood. Moses repeatedly emphasizes his concern that they faithfully maintain a good relationship with God. An exclusive devotion to God expressed in everyday life is the key to a lifetime of blessing.<\/p>\n<p>The primary need of love toward God and neighbor eventually became a basic requirement for the followers of Jesus Christ (Lk 10:25-28). The book of Deuteronomy is thus crucially important to the Christian concern to maintain a vital relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeuteronomyandtheLaw\">Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>To designate the book of Deuteronomy as a “second law” or a repetition of the law is misleading. Moses’ emphasis is not legalistic. Details of worship and ritual are not repeated or delineated to any great extent. Although the Ten Commandments are repeated, emphasis is placed on the first commandment, explicitly requiring exclusive devotion to God. Moses is primarily concerned with Israel’s relationship with God and their determination to maintain it in their own and their children’s lives.<\/p>\n<p>The NT reveals that a legalistic interpretation of the Mosaic revelation was held by the Jews of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Such legalism developed in Judaism especially during the intertestamental era. The Judaistic legalism of NT times has in modern times been ascribed wrongly to Moses. Moses did warn of the necessity of keeping all of God’s law (Dt 28:1, 58), but in Deuteronomy his message as a whole makes it clear that he was not exclusively concerned about legalistic observance. Rather, the central theme of Deuteronomy is the unique relationship that had been established by a unique God with a unique people, the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Brief Historical Review (1:1–4:43)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses is identified as the speaker, addressing the Israelites on the plains of Moab during the last year of his life. The Israelites were on the verge of entering the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>Moses began with a reference to Mt Sinai, scene of the greatest revelation in OT times. He focused attention on God’s explicit command for them to move up to Canaan and occupy the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Their rebellion brought divine judgment, so the conquest of Canaan had been delayed 38 years while an entire disobedient generation died in the wilderness.<\/p>\n<p>Instructed by God not to molest the Edomites or Moabites, Moses had led the Israelites to the Moab plains north of the Arnon River. The Israelites defeated Sihon, the Amorite king of Heshbon, and Og, king of Bashan. The tribes of Reuben and Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh appropriated the territory east of the Jordan River as their land (Nm 32). On the basis of that conquest, Moses encouraged Joshua to believe that God would aid him and the Israelites in the conquest of the land of Canaan west of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should learn from the mistakes of the generation that died in the wilderness (Dt 4:1-40). They should consider the fact that the word of God had been spoken to them. The revelation that had come to them through Moses was unique, and the most important thing was for them to revere the God who had revealed himself. The uniqueness of Israel’s God among the nations that worship idols should never be forgotten.<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the Israelites that they had entered into a contractual agreement with their unique God. That covenant was mentioned 26 more times by Moses. No nation had ever experienced anything like it. If Israel obeyed, they would enjoy God’s blessing and favor.<\/p>\n<h5>Exhortations and Applications (4:44–26:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The circumstances in which Moses addressed the Israelites are reported in a short transitional passage (Dt 4:44-49). From the slopes of Mt Pisgah (or Nebo), with Israel encamped in the valley opposite Beth-peor, Moses made his appeal to the people before they crossed the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ exposition of the “great commandment” is centered in the agreement made between God and Israel. He repeated the Ten Commandments as the essence of God’s revelation at Sinai. As Moses explained what God expected of Israel, he elaborated the first commandment: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (5:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). Their relationship with God was of basic importance, since God’s wrath will be against those who worship other gods (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Love is the key word in the relationship between God and Israel. Moses boldly asserted, “Hear, O Israel! The <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, the <span>Lord<\/span> alone. And you must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Dt 6:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>). All other commandments are significant because they bear on that relationship (as spelled out in chs 5–11).<\/p>\n<p>Exclusive love and devotion to God are essential. In a relationship of wholehearted love, no idols can be recognized or tolerated. Yet Moses wanted Israel to convey its consciousness of God to future generations by many external things: signs on their hands, frontlets (or “phylacteries”) on their foreheads, Scripture verses on their doorposts, and so on. By precept and example they should convey to their children that they love God (Dt 6).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should never forget that God had chosen them to be his people (Dt 7). They were to execute God’s judgment on the Canaanites, who had been spared judgment since Abraham’s time (Gn 15:16). Although the Israelites themselves did not merit God’s love, in love and mercy he had redeemed them out of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Moses appealed to the people to remember what God had done for them (Dt 8). To God’s sustaining provisions they should respond with thankfulness, recognizing that the power to achieve anything they had done had been God’s gift.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had repeatedly failed in their faith and commitment to God (9:1–10:11). Through Moses’ intercession they had been spared. It was for no merit of their own that they would enter Canaan; that was God’s gracious provision for them. Moses’ appeal for a wholehearted commitment is summarized in Deuteronomy 10:12–11:32. It is necessary to display reverence, respect, love, and obedience to God (see also 6:5, 13, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The God whom the Israelites must love sincerely and without reservation is the Lord of the cosmos. He is the righteous judge who rules supreme over all nature and history. God loved their forefathers, the patriarchs. He redeemed the Israelites from Egyptian enslavement and gave them his covenant. He manifested himself in helping the orphans, widows, and strangers. He multiplied Israel to be as numerous as the stars of the heavens.<\/p>\n<p>Moses gave two basic instructions to apply in daily life to maintain their relationship with God as a reality: “circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart” (Dt 10:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). He did not refer to physical circumcision, a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gn 17). Circumcision, which was not observed during the years of wilderness wanderings, was reinstituted under Joshua after the Israelites crossed the Jordan River (Jos 5:2-9). Moses referred to “spiritual circumcision” (see Lv 26:40-41; Jer 4:4; 9:25; Rom 2:29). All things that might restrict, interfere with, or negate total devotion to God were to be cut away (circumcised) so that the Israelites would continue to love God with all their heart.<\/p>\n<p>“Love the foreigner” (Dt 10:19) ranks second in importance to wholehearted love for God. Love for the stranger or neighbor is basic to all other human obligations (see Lv 19:9-18). Social obligations issue out of a person’s relationship with God. Being recipients of God’s love, the Israelites were to love others. They were to remember God’s love for them when they were slaves and strangers in Egypt. God loves the stranger, the widow, and the orphan; therefore, if anyone loves God, he or she is under obligation to love other people. God is concerned about justice and righteousness; a person who professes to love God must be concerned about just treatment for other people.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites were to be known for their concern for people whose social position exposed them to exploitation and oppression. The profound humanitarian spirit of the Mosaic law stands in unique contrast to the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian and Hittite law codes of that day. In those codes human relationships reflected no vital consciousness of a love relationship with deity.<\/p>\n<p>In the first century <span>AD<\/span> Jesus Christ came into conflict with Jewish religious leaders who had lost the essence of God’s law in a maze of legalism. For Jesus, the greatest commandment was to love God; the second was to love one’s neighbor. Those two commandments (which constitute the essence of the entire OT revelation) would, if kept perfectly, provide the basis for eternal life (Mt 22:37-39; Mk 12:29-31; Lk 10:27-28). Christians believe that the climax of God’s revelation of love came in Jesus Christ. For them, responding to God’s love means to accept Jesus Christ in wholehearted devotion and to love one’s neighbor as Jesus exemplified in his life.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 12:1–26:19, Moses gave instruction in practical living for a God-related people when they resided in the land God had promised to them. Having once survived on manna supplied directly by God, in Canaan they would enjoy the fruit and produce of the land. They would also encounter a culture permeated by Canaanite religion.<\/p>\n<p>In worshiping God in their new setting, they were cautioned to maintain due sanctity (Dt 12:1–14:21). They were not to worship at pagan shrines. They should bring their offerings to divinely appointed places for fellowship and rejoicing together in the Lord’s presence. Idolatry was not to be tolerated in any form. Any prophet who deviated from the law of Moses in advising the worship of other gods should be stoned. Exclusive devotion to God was to be daily practice.<\/p>\n<p>Canaan’s abundant blessings should be shared with neighbors (14:22–15:23). Tithes should be brought to the central sanctuary where Levites assisted the priests in religious ministration. Joy in sharing life’s blessings and opportunities was to characterize Israel’s pattern of living.<\/p>\n<p>Moses prescribed three annual pilgrimages (16:1-17). The people should remember their deliverance out of Egypt by observing the feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread. Seven weeks later, when the barley harvest was completed, they should spend time rejoicing before the Lord in a one-day festival called the Feast of Weeks. When the vintage as well as the grain harvest was completed, they were to observe the Feast of Ingathering (or Booths), a time of thanksgiving and sharing with others. Every seven years the law was read at the Feast of Ingathering.<\/p>\n<p>In human relations justice was to prevail among the Israelites (16:18–21:23). The Book of the Law kept at the main sanctuary was their divine authority, providing God’s instructions for them. The king was to have a copy of this law and govern his life in accordance with it. Prophets and priests played an important role as religious leaders in the life of Israel. Judicial authority was vested in the priests. In contrast to the brutality of other nations, humanitarian principles were to prevail in Israel’s warfare. Fathers were responsible for their own family households.<\/p>\n<p>In domestic and social relationships, the law of love was to prevail (22:1–26:19). Many regulations governed family life. In matters of sustenance, wages, and business dealings, the Israelites were admonished to be compassionate and just. Promises and warnings raised their consciousness about using the resources of land and animals entrusted to them so that their stewardship would please God.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 26, Moses instructed the Israelites in two liturgical confessions and a reaffirmation of the covenant. By acknowledging that God was the giver of all they had, and by confessing before God that they shared his gifts with others, they confirmed their covenant with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Alternatives: Blessings or Curses (27:1–30:20)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses set before the Israelites the alternatives of blessings or curses. Under Joshua they were to renew the covenant publicly. At Mt Ebal stones were to be erected for inscribing the law and an altar constructed for offering sacrifice. The curses were to be read from Mt Ebal and the blessings from Mt Gerizim. Conditional self-curses were read regarding offenses against God and other human beings (Dt 27:15-26). Thus they acknowledged their accountability to God. Though their sins might be hidden from people, it was God to whom they were primarily and ultimately accountable. Blessings as a way of life and curses as a way of death were clearly set before the Israelites (ch 28). Setting them in the perspective of history, Moses appealed to the new generation to take advantage of their present opportunity (ch 29). Warning that, should they fail to love God, they would ultimately be subjected to dispersion, Moses admonished them to choose the way of life and good rather than the way of death and evil (ch 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Transition: from Moses to Joshua (31:1–34:12)<\/h5>\n<p>When the life and ministry of Moses were nearing completion, and transfer of leadership was near (Dt 31:1–34:12), Joshua had already been designated by God as Israel’s new leader. Moses assured the Israelites that God would be the same with Joshua in charge. The revelation given through Moses had been put in writing and now was committed to the priests, the custodians of the Book of the Law. Joshua, who had already distinguished himself in responsible leadership, was publicly confirmed at the door of the tabernacle (31:1-29).<\/p>\n<p>The “Song of Moses” is the covenant’s document of witness (32:1-47). In it Moses spoke with prophetic understanding as he recounted Israel’s past experience. Reiterating the consequences of their attitude toward God, he assured the people of restoration if they failed again. He encouraged them to fix their hearts on what God had revealed to them and to impress it on their children. Keeping the covenant by maintaining a wholehearted love for God would be important for all future generations as well as for those then listening to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>After some final, brief instructions (32:48-52), Moses pronounced his blessings on the Israelites, whom he had led for 40 years (33:1-29). In his final blessing, also called the “Testament of Moses,” the greatness of God and his special relationship with Israel are delineated. Israel is unique among all the nations of the world.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy appropriately ends with an account of the death of Moses, the greatest prophet in OT times (34:1-12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Moses.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEUTERONOMY, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for the nation of Israel. Moses’ reminders of the wilderness wanderings and the Ten Commandments, plus his instructions for life in the Promised Land, are a vital part of the OT covenant literature.<\/p>\n\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>• Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>• Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandAuthorship\">Date and Authorship<\/p>\n<p>Two basic views (with variations) on the date and authorship of Deuteronomy are advocated by modern biblical scholars. Those who consider Moses the author date the book in the 14th or 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. Others believe that it was composed by an unknown author in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>, when Josiah was king in the southern kingdom of Judah.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for a Seventh-Century Date<\/h5>\n<p>As early as 1805, W. M. L. de Wette advocated that Deuteronomy was used by Josiah in his seventh-century reforms, and that it was written shortly before that. Biblical critic Julius Wellhausen adopted that view, which has been advocated by many scholars ever since S. R. Driver publicized it in his <em>Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament<\/em> (1891). According to that view, the book was written late but ascribed to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>Many modern scholars, such as Gerhard von Rad and G. E. Wright, regard Moses as the founder of Israel’s faith. They argue that whatever in Deuteronomy is from Moses was transmitted orally until about the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. Denying that Moses actually wrote Deuteronomy, they attribute its present form to numerous writers and editors over an extended period of centuries.<\/p>\n<h5>The Case for Mosaic Authorship<\/h5>\n<p>In recent decades, studies of Hittite suzerainty treaties from the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> have yielded interesting comparisons between those treaty forms and the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. In 1954 G. Mendenhall suggested that the form of the covenant at Mt Sinai was the same literary form used by Hittites in treaties with Syrian vassal states during the 14th and 13th centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In 1960 M. G. Kline applied that idea to the book of Deuteronomy, seeing it as a renewal of the Sinaitic covenant and outlining its structure as a literary unit reflecting the pattern of Hittite covenant forms.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy does contain certain parallels to Hittite vassal treaties. As a renewal treaty it appeals to the covenant of God with Israel at Mt Sinai, recorded in the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>1. The “preamble” in ancient Hittite treaties usually identified the suzerain or ruler. In Deuteronomy 1:1-5 (Ex 20:1) Moses as the speaker represents God, the King of Israel. As his death approaches, Moses makes an appeal for the renewal of the covenant.<\/p>\n<li>2. In the “historical prologue” the suzerain usually cited the benefits he had bestowed on his vassal. In Deuteronomy 1:6–4:49 (Ex 20:2) Moses declares what God has done for Israel since his revelation at Mt Sinai. Moses reminds the people of Israel of God’s faithfulness even when they had been unfaithful.<\/li>\n<li>3. The “stipulations” were usually stated by the suzerain in the treaty’s third division. In Deuteronomy 5–26 Moses outlines the stipulations for Israel in their covenant relationship to God. The basic requirement in Deuteronomy 5–11 (Ex 20:3-17) is exclusive, wholehearted love for God. In the following chapters, Deuteronomy 12–26, the basic principle of exclusive love for God is applied to specific areas of culticceremonial consecration (Dt 12:1–16:17), judicial justice in government (16:18–21:23), the sanctity of God’s order (chs 22–25), and public acknowledgment of God as their Redeemer and King (ch 26).<\/li>\n<li>4. “Covenant ratification” usually contained a provision for treaty renewal and a formula for curses and blessings. In Deuteronomy 27 provision is made for Joshua to conclude the renewal of the covenant after the Israelites occupy the land. In addition, the divine threat and promise are expressed in blessings and curses as Israel swears its oath of allegiance on the plains of Moab.<\/li>\n<li>5. “Succession arrangements” were usually the concluding part of suzerainty-vassal treaties. In chapters 31–34 Joshua is designated as Moses’ successor. The written text is deposited in the sanctuary with the song of witness and a testamentary blessing by Moses. The book of Deuteronomy thus constitutes the documentary witness of God’s covenant as it concludes with the death of Moses.<\/li>\n<p>The fact that the literary structure of Deuteronomy parallels the legal forms characteristic of ancient Hittite treaties supports the traditional viewpoint that Moses is the author of Deuteronomy. When Moses is recognized as the mediator between God and Israel in the Sinaitic covenant, it is significant that the book of Deuteronomy represents Moses’ renewal of the covenant in the literary form current in the culture of his day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalSetting\">Historical Setting<\/p>\n<p>Moses led the Israelites from Egypt through the wilderness to the plains of Moab east of the Dead Sea. Exodus 1–19 gives an account of the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt, the birth and preparation of Moses, his contest with the pharaoh, the miraculous deliverance out of Egypt, and the journey to Mt Sinai (probably also known as Mt Horeb).<\/p>\n<p>In that desert area God’s great revelation came to Israel through Moses (Ex 20–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 1–9). At Mt Sinai, God identified himself as the one who had delivered the Israelites. There he established an agreement by which they would be exclusively devoted to him as his holy nation. There the tabernacle was built and the priesthood established. Instructions were given for making sacrifices and offerings, and for observing feasts and seasons, so that Israel’s pattern of living would show that they were God’s holy people. The tribes were also organized for encampment around the tabernacle and for the march to Canaan, the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Numbers 10–21 is an account of the 38 years the Israelites spent in the wilderness. In 11 days they marched from Mt Horeb to Kadesh-barnea, about 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of Beersheba. From there 12 spies were sent into Canaan. Their report produced a crisis in the form of a revolt against God. Subsequently, Israel wandered in the wilderness for 38 years, during which those who had been at least 20 years old when they left Egypt died. The new generation moved to the plains of Moab, located east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon River. Numbers 20–36 tells of the conquest and occupation of the land east of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy presents Moses’ address to the new generation of Israelites. In Exodus and Numbers God frequently speaks to Moses; in Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking at God’s command to the Israelites (Dt 1:1-4; 5:1; 29:1). In contrast to the preceding books, Deuteronomy has a style of exhortation in which Moses admonishes the new generation about their responsibility in view of the preceding generation’s failures. Whatever repetition occurs in Deuteronomy is carefully selected, with the specific purpose of warning the new generation so that they will not fail to conquer and occupy Canaan. Deuteronomy is not primarily retrospective; its outlook is optimistic about the future, offering hope for fulfilling the promises God made to the Israelites in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SignificanceofDeuteronomy\">Significance of Deuteronomy<\/p>\n<p>Deuteronomy (with Genesis, Psalms, and Isaiah) is among the most frequently quoted books in the early Christian centuries. More than 80 OT quotations in the NT come from Deuteronomy.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus focused attention on Deuteronomy when he summarized the essence of the entire OT Law and Prophets in the two great commandments of love for God and neighbor (Mt 22:37; see Dt 6:5; 10:19). Jesus also quoted Deuteronomy (6:13, 16; 8:3) in his temptation experience (Mt 4:4-10). Deuteronomy unfolds the essence of what God revealed to Moses at Mt Sinai. In Deuteronomy, Moses shares with the Israelites the core of God’s revelation without repeating details of sacrifices, observances, or rituals. He expounds the character of Israel’s faith and nationhood. Moses repeatedly emphasizes his concern that they faithfully maintain a good relationship with God. An exclusive devotion to God expressed in everyday life is the key to a lifetime of blessing.<\/p>\n<p>The primary need of love toward God and neighbor eventually became a basic requirement for the followers of Jesus Christ (Lk 10:25-28). The book of Deuteronomy is thus crucially important to the Christian concern to maintain a vital relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeuteronomyandtheLaw\">Deuteronomy and the Law<\/p>\n<p>To designate the book of Deuteronomy as a “second law” or a repetition of the law is misleading. Moses’ emphasis is not legalistic. Details of worship and ritual are not repeated or delineated to any great extent. Although the Ten Commandments are repeated, emphasis is placed on the first commandment, explicitly requiring exclusive devotion to God. Moses is primarily concerned with Israel’s relationship with God and their determination to maintain it in their own and their children’s lives.<\/p>\n<p>The NT reveals that a legalistic interpretation of the Mosaic revelation was held by the Jews of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Such legalism developed in Judaism especially during the intertestamental era. The Judaistic legalism of NT times has in modern times been ascribed wrongly to Moses. Moses did warn of the necessity of keeping all of God’s law (Dt 28:1, 58), but in Deuteronomy his message as a whole makes it clear that he was not exclusively concerned about legalistic observance. Rather, the central theme of Deuteronomy is the unique relationship that had been established by a unique God with a unique people, the Israelites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Brief Historical Review (1:1–4:43)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses is identified as the speaker, addressing the Israelites on the plains of Moab during the last year of his life. The Israelites were on the verge of entering the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>Moses began with a reference to Mt Sinai, scene of the greatest revelation in OT times. He focused attention on God’s explicit command for them to move up to Canaan and occupy the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Their rebellion brought divine judgment, so the conquest of Canaan had been delayed 38 years while an entire disobedient generation died in the wilderness.<\/p>\n<p>Instructed by God not to molest the Edomites or Moabites, Moses had led the Israelites to the Moab plains north of the Arnon River. The Israelites defeated Sihon, the Amorite king of Heshbon, and Og, king of Bashan. The tribes of Reuben and Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh appropriated the territory east of the Jordan River as their land (Nm 32). On the basis of that conquest, Moses encouraged Joshua to believe that God would aid him and the Israelites in the conquest of the land of Canaan west of the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should learn from the mistakes of the generation that died in the wilderness (Dt 4:1-40). They should consider the fact that the word of God had been spoken to them. The revelation that had come to them through Moses was unique, and the most important thing was for them to revere the God who had revealed himself. The uniqueness of Israel’s God among the nations that worship idols should never be forgotten.<\/p>\n<p>Moses reminded the Israelites that they had entered into a contractual agreement with their unique God. That covenant was mentioned 26 more times by Moses. No nation had ever experienced anything like it. If Israel obeyed, they would enjoy God’s blessing and favor.<\/p>\n<h5>Exhortations and Applications (4:44–26:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The circumstances in which Moses addressed the Israelites are reported in a short transitional passage (Dt 4:44-49). From the slopes of Mt Pisgah (or Nebo), with Israel encamped in the valley opposite Beth-peor, Moses made his appeal to the people before they crossed the Jordan River.<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ exposition of the “great commandment” is centered in the agreement made between God and Israel. He repeated the Ten Commandments as the essence of God’s revelation at Sinai. As Moses explained what God expected of Israel, he elaborated the first commandment: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (5:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). Their relationship with God was of basic importance, since God’s wrath will be against those who worship other gods (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Love is the key word in the relationship between God and Israel. Moses boldly asserted, “Hear, O Israel! The <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, the <span>Lord<\/span> alone. And you must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Dt 6:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>). All other commandments are significant because they bear on that relationship (as spelled out in chs 5–11).<\/p>\n<p>Exclusive love and devotion to God are essential. In a relationship of wholehearted love, no idols can be recognized or tolerated. Yet Moses wanted Israel to convey its consciousness of God to future generations by many external things: signs on their hands, frontlets (or “phylacteries”) on their foreheads, Scripture verses on their doorposts, and so on. By precept and example they should convey to their children that they love God (Dt 6).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites should never forget that God had chosen them to be his people (Dt 7). They were to execute God’s judgment on the Canaanites, who had been spared judgment since Abraham’s time (Gn 15:16). Although the Israelites themselves did not merit God’s love, in love and mercy he had redeemed them out of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Moses appealed to the people to remember what God had done for them (Dt 8). To God’s sustaining provisions they should respond with thankfulness, recognizing that the power to achieve anything they had done had been God’s gift.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites had repeatedly failed in their faith and commitment to God (9:1–10:11). Through Moses’ intercession they had been spared. It was for no merit of their own that they would enter Canaan; that was God’s gracious provision for them. Moses’ appeal for a wholehearted commitment is summarized in Deuteronomy 10:12–11:32. It is necessary to display reverence, respect, love, and obedience to God (see also 6:5, 13, 24).<\/p>\n<p>The God whom the Israelites must love sincerely and without reservation is the Lord of the cosmos. He is the righteous judge who rules supreme over all nature and history. God loved their forefathers, the patriarchs. He redeemed the Israelites from Egyptian enslavement and gave them his covenant. He manifested himself in helping the orphans, widows, and strangers. He multiplied Israel to be as numerous as the stars of the heavens.<\/p>\n<p>Moses gave two basic instructions to apply in daily life to maintain their relationship with God as a reality: “circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart” (Dt 10:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). He did not refer to physical circumcision, a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gn 17). Circumcision, which was not observed during the years of wilderness wanderings, was reinstituted under Joshua after the Israelites crossed the Jordan River (Jos 5:2-9). Moses referred to “spiritual circumcision” (see Lv 26:40-41; Jer 4:4; 9:25; Rom 2:29). All things that might restrict, interfere with, or negate total devotion to God were to be cut away (circumcised) so that the Israelites would continue to love God with all their heart.<\/p>\n<p>“Love the foreigner” (Dt 10:19) ranks second in importance to wholehearted love for God. Love for the stranger or neighbor is basic to all other human obligations (see Lv 19:9-18). Social obligations issue out of a person’s relationship with God. Being recipients of God’s love, the Israelites were to love others. They were to remember God’s love for them when they were slaves and strangers in Egypt. God loves the stranger, the widow, and the orphan; therefore, if anyone loves God, he or she is under obligation to love other people. God is concerned about justice and righteousness; a person who professes to love God must be concerned about just treatment for other people.<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites were to be known for their concern for people whose social position exposed them to exploitation and oppression. The profound humanitarian spirit of the Mosaic law stands in unique contrast to the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian and Hittite law codes of that day. In those codes human relationships reflected no vital consciousness of a love relationship with deity.<\/p>\n<p>In the first century <span>AD<\/span> Jesus Christ came into conflict with Jewish religious leaders who had lost the essence of God’s law in a maze of legalism. For Jesus, the greatest commandment was to love God; the second was to love one’s neighbor. Those two commandments (which constitute the essence of the entire OT revelation) would, if kept perfectly, provide the basis for eternal life (Mt 22:37-39; Mk 12:29-31; Lk 10:27-28). Christians believe that the climax of God’s revelation of love came in Jesus Christ. For them, responding to God’s love means to accept Jesus Christ in wholehearted devotion and to love one’s neighbor as Jesus exemplified in his life.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 12:1–26:19, Moses gave instruction in practical living for a God-related people when they resided in the land God had promised to them. Having once survived on manna supplied directly by God, in Canaan they would enjoy the fruit and produce of the land. They would also encounter a culture permeated by Canaanite religion.<\/p>\n<p>In worshiping God in their new setting, they were cautioned to maintain due sanctity (Dt 12:1–14:21). They were not to worship at pagan shrines. They should bring their offerings to divinely appointed places for fellowship and rejoicing together in the Lord’s presence. Idolatry was not to be tolerated in any form. Any prophet who deviated from the law of Moses in advising the worship of other gods should be stoned. Exclusive devotion to God was to be daily practice.<\/p>\n<p>Canaan’s abundant blessings should be shared with neighbors (14:22–15:23). Tithes should be brought to the central sanctuary where Levites assisted the priests in religious ministration. Joy in sharing life’s blessings and opportunities was to characterize Israel’s pattern of living.<\/p>\n<p>Moses prescribed three annual pilgrimages (16:1-17). The people should remember their deliverance out of Egypt by observing the feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread. Seven weeks later, when the barley harvest was completed, they should spend time rejoicing before the Lord in a one-day festival called the Feast of Weeks. When the vintage as well as the grain harvest was completed, they were to observe the Feast of Ingathering (or Booths), a time of thanksgiving and sharing with others. Every seven years the law was read at the Feast of Ingathering.<\/p>\n<p>In human relations justice was to prevail among the Israelites (16:18–21:23). The Book of the Law kept at the main sanctuary was their divine authority, providing God’s instructions for them. The king was to have a copy of this law and govern his life in accordance with it. Prophets and priests played an important role as religious leaders in the life of Israel. Judicial authority was vested in the priests. In contrast to the brutality of other nations, humanitarian principles were to prevail in Israel’s warfare. Fathers were responsible for their own family households.<\/p>\n<p>In domestic and social relationships, the law of love was to prevail (22:1–26:19). Many regulations governed family life. In matters of sustenance, wages, and business dealings, the Israelites were admonished to be compassionate and just. Promises and warnings raised their consciousness about using the resources of land and animals entrusted to them so that their stewardship would please God.<\/p>\n<p>In Deuteronomy 26, Moses instructed the Israelites in two liturgical confessions and a reaffirmation of the covenant. By acknowledging that God was the giver of all they had, and by confessing before God that they shared his gifts with others, they confirmed their covenant with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Alternatives: Blessings or Curses (27:1–30:20)<\/h5>\n<p>Moses set before the Israelites the alternatives of blessings or curses. Under Joshua they were to renew the covenant publicly. At Mt Ebal stones were to be erected for inscribing the law and an altar constructed for offering sacrifice. The curses were to be read from Mt Ebal and the blessings from Mt Gerizim. Conditional self-curses were read regarding offenses against God and other human beings (Dt 27:15-26). Thus they acknowledged their accountability to God. Though their sins might be hidden from people, it was God to whom they were primarily and ultimately accountable. Blessings as a way of life and curses as a way of death were clearly set before the Israelites (ch 28). Setting them in the perspective of history, Moses appealed to the new generation to take advantage of their present opportunity (ch 29). Warning that, should they fail to love God, they would ultimately be subjected to dispersion, Moses admonished them to choose the way of life and good rather than the way of death and evil (ch 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Transition: from Moses to Joshua (31:1–34:12)<\/h5>\n<p>When the life and ministry of Moses were nearing completion, and transfer of leadership was near (Dt 31:1–34:12), Joshua had already been designated by God as Israel’s new leader. Moses assured the Israelites that God would be the same with Joshua in charge. The revelation given through Moses had been put in writing and now was committed to the priests, the custodians of the Book of the Law. Joshua, who had already distinguished himself in responsible leadership, was publicly confirmed at the door of the tabernacle (31:1-29).<\/p>\n<p>The “Song of Moses” is the covenant’s document of witness (32:1-47). In it Moses spoke with prophetic understanding as he recounted Israel’s past experience. Reiterating the consequences of their attitude toward God, he assured the people of restoration if they failed again. He encouraged them to fix their hearts on what God had revealed to them and to impress it on their children. Keeping the covenant by maintaining a wholehearted love for God would be important for all future generations as well as for those then listening to Moses.<\/p>\n<p>After some final, brief instructions (32:48-52), Moses pronounced his blessings on the Israelites, whom he had led for 40 years (33:1-29). In his final blessing, also called the “Testament of Moses,” the greatness of God and his special relationship with Israel are delineated. Israel is unique among all the nations of the world.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy appropriately ends with an account of the death of Moses, the greatest prophet in OT times (34:1-12).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Moses.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEUTERONOMY, Book of Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for ...","summary_en":"DEUTERONOMY, Book of Fifth book of the OT, and last of the Pentateuch (the five books of the Law). In it Moses restated to the people of Israel various laws and precepts of the covenant that God had revealed to them at Mt Sinai. Thus, the book has become known in Greek and Latin tradition as Deuteronomy (“second law”). That name has led some to misinterpret the significance of its contents as secondary. The book makes an important contribution to God’s unfolding revelation of his purpose for ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14106,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Being and Attributes of God","title_en":"Being and Attributes of God","content_ro":"<h3>GOD, Being and Attributes of<\/h3>\n<p>Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Acts 14:16-17; 17:22-31). The fullest revelation of God’s attributes is seen in his work of redemption through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>How does Scripture express the characteristics of God? First, in the divine names by which God revealed himself (Gn 1:1; 2:4; 17:1; Ex 3:6, 14-15; 6:2-5). Some of God’s attributes are revealed implicitly in the biblical accounts of Creation, fall, Flood, Babel, and the exodus, and more fully in the various covenants God made with his people. To Israel, he identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Ex 3:15). To the pharaoh, he identified himself as the “God of Israel” or the “God of the Hebrews” (5:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>By the time the people of Israel had reached Mt Sinai, the revelation of God’s attributes in the biblical narrative had become more explicit: “The <span>Lord<\/span>, the <span>Lord<\/span>, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation” (Ex 34:6-7, <span>rsv<\/span>). This summary is repeated elsewhere with slight variations (Nm 14:18; Neh 9:17; Ps 103:8; Jer 32:18; Jon 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>• Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>• Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAttributesofGod\">The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>The historic Christian confessions refer to various characteristics of God without calling them attributes or classifying them. The Westminster Shorter Catechism (1647) shows a tendency toward classification, describing God as “a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.” The first four attributes qualify the others.<\/p>\n<p>Several ways of classifying the attributes have been suggested. Generally such schemes divide the divine attributes into pairs: negative and positive, natural and moral, absolute and relative, immanent and eminent, intransitive and transitive, quiescent and operative, antithetical and synthetical, or incommunicable and communicable. Roman Catholics prefer the distinction of negative and positive, or natural and moral. Lutherans generally favor the distinction between quiescent and operative attributes. Reformed and evangelical scholars usually distinguish incommunicable and communicable attributes. Karl Barth grouped the attributes under freedom and love, and then proposed pairs of attributes that reflect freedom-love or love-freedom. In spite of the diversity of labels given the groups of attributes, surprising agreement exists in the attributes listed under each group.<\/p>\n<p>This article will make a distinction between incommunicable and communicable attributes without considering the classification itself as significant. No classification of God’s attributes is fully satisfactory. The <em>incommunicable<\/em> attributes emphasize the absolute distinctness of God, his transcendent greatness and exalted nature. Such attributes have little or no analogy in God’s creatures. The <em>communicable<\/em> attributes find some reflection or analogy in human beings created in God’s image. They indicate the immanence of God in relation to creatures. Yet all the attributes are God’s attributes; the distinction between God and man, between Creator and creature, is always basic.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IncommunicableAttributes\">Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Acknowledging some diversity of theological opinion, the following attributes will be considered incommunicable: unity, spirituality, independence, immutability, eternity, and immensity. In addition, the incomprehensibility of God must be mentioned.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>incomprehensibility<\/em> is sometimes included in lists of his attributes. It seems preferable to regard it as a description of human inability to understand God fully. Incomprehensibility is therefore not an attribute, although it is a given in every discussion of God. Through his revelation God is truly known by faith, yet no creature will ever comprehend God the Creator. Likewise, no one will ever fully understand any one of God’s attributes. Acknowledgment of God’s incomprehensibility should contribute to a spirit of humility in every consideration of God and his attributes (Pss 139:6; 145:3; Is 40:28; 55:8-9; Mt 11:25-27; Rom 11:33-36; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 13:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>unity<\/em> is an expression of monotheism—the fact that the God of Scripture is the only, living, true God (Dt 6:4; Mk 12:29; Jn 17:3). All other gods are idols and figments of human imagination. This attribute is reflected in the first commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me” (Ex 20:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>spirituality<\/em> indicates that God is not physical and is invisible. Positively it means that God is personal, living, self-conscious, and self-determining. The invisible God cannot be seen by human eyes (Ex 33:20), so the second commandment forbids every visible representation of God (20:4). Because God is Spirit, he must be worshiped in spirit and in truth (Jn 4:24).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>independence<\/em> or self-existence indicates that he is not dependent upon anything outside himself. He is self-sufficient in his existence, in his decrees, and in all his works. God has “life in himself” (Jn 5:26) and “he himself gives life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:25). To Israel, he revealed himself as the “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Ex 3:14), and he made Israel a covenant people for his own possession. God continues to work out his will in the world, and even though he uses various means, his independence remains intact. Thus, he enters into fellowship with his covenant people, and he publishes the gospel through human agents.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immutability<\/em> or constancy expresses his changelessness and his faithfulness to himself, to his decrees, promises, and works. He remains forever the same true God who undergoes no change from within or from anything outside himself. And so in James 1:17 we read: “Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change” (<span>rsv<\/span>). God’s oath to Abraham expressed his immutability so that his covenant people could be sure of the “unchangeable character of his purpose” (Heb 6:17). Samuel told King Saul that the Lord would not “change his mind; for he is not a man” (1 Sm 15:29, <span>niv<\/span>; cf. Nm 23:19). “For I the <span>Lord<\/span> do not change” (Mal 3:6). That was God’s explanation for not destroying sinful Judah; he shows mercy and keeps his covenant. Because “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever,” Christians are warned not to be “led by diverse and strange teachings” (Heb 13:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>God’s immutability or constancy does not imply that he is static or immobile. He is a dynamic, living God who is constantly working (Jn 5:17). Sometimes God is described as being sorry, repenting, or changing his mind (Gn 6:6-7; 1 Sm 15:11; Jon 3:10). In their contexts, such figurative expressions show the constancy of a God who, in holiness and righteousness, always abhors sin and reacts against it. In his grace and mercy, he forgives the penitent, and he carries out his promises without fail (Ps 110:4; Is 46:10; Jer 18:7-10; Eph 1:11). Thus, the constancy of God is significant in all human relationships with him, including petitions offered in prayer.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>eternity<\/em> indicates his transcendence over time. He is timeless and everlasting. He has no beginning or end; he does not undergo growth, development, or maturation. He existed before the creation of the world; he dwells now in eternity; he will continue as the eternal God even when history ends. Scripture speaks of God as “eternal” (Dt 33:27), “the King” (1 Tm 1:17), “the beginning and the end” (Rv 22:13). He “inhabits eternity” (Is 57:15) and his “years have no end” (Ps 102:27; cf. 2 Pt 3:8). Although God is above time and is timeless, time is his creation and history is the arena of his work. “When the time had fully come God sent forth his Son” (Gal 4:4); Jesus Christ died on a Friday and rose on the third day.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immensity<\/em> and <em>omnipresence<\/em> express his transcendence over space. God fills heaven and earth (Jer 23:23-24). Heaven is his throne, and the earth his footstool, so he is not restricted to a temple building (Is 66:1; Acts 17:24). Yet God is immanent in this world and is actively at work in it to establish his kingdom. No one can hide from the omnipresent God (Ps 139:6-12). Jesus promised, “I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:20). Since Pentecost (Acts 2), the Holy Spirit is said actually to dwell within the bodies of believers (1 Cor 6:19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CommunicableAttributes\">Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Many attributes of God can be classified under this heading, although it is sometimes difficult to say which biblical references to God should be regarded as attributes. A rich diversity of terminology is found in Scripture, with many synonyms. For convenience, the communicable attributes are often classified as intellectual, moral, and volitional.<\/p>\n<h5>Intellectual Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>knowledge<\/em> indicates that in a unique way God knows himself and all things possible and actual. <em>Omniscience<\/em> means that “he knows everything” (1 Jn 3:20). “Even before a word is on my tongue, lo, O <span>Lord<\/span>, thou knowest it altogether” (Ps 139:4), including the secret thoughts of a person’s heart. God’s righteous judgment is rooted in the fact that he “knows the thoughts of man” (Ps 94:11). Acknowledging that God’s omniscience is incomprehensible, the psalmist finds it a source of comfort (139:1-5). All the “treasures of wisdom and knowledge” are hidden in Christ (Col 2:3); therefore, the Christian is told to bring every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Cor 10:5). Christian sanctification includes renewal in knowledge to become more like Christ (Col 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>wisdom<\/em> indicates that he uses his knowledge in the best possible manner to achieve his goals. God’s works are varied, but they are all done in wisdom (Ps 104:24). “The <span>Lord<\/span> by wisdom founded the earth” (Prv 3:19); his providence also displays his wisdom (Gn 50:20). Redemption through Jesus Christ reveals God’s wisdom (1 Cor 1:24) and awakens awe and praise (Rom 11:33-36). Human beings should seek wisdom (Prv 3:21)—wisdom rooted in the fear of God (Jb 28:28; Ps 111:10; Prv 9:10). Christians are said to be “wise in Christ” (1 Cor 4:10), and Christ charges them to act wisely (Mt 10:16), thus emulating the wisdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>veracity<\/em> expresses his truthfulness and faithfulness. He is the truth and he is faithful to himself, to his Word, and to his promises (2 Tm 2:13). “God is light and in him is no darkness at all” (1 Jn 1:5); therefore, his followers are to walk in the light (vv 6-7). Jesus is “the way, and the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6); hence, Christians are to walk in the truth and show faithfulness in their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Moral Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>The most comprehensive description of God’s moral character is his <em>goodness.<\/em> God deals bountifully and kindly with all his creatures. He is “good to all” (Ps 145:9). Jesus insisted that “no one is good but God alone” (Mk 10:18; Lk 18:19). The redeemed praise God for his goodness (1 Chr 16:34; 2 Chr 5:13; Pss 106:1; 107:1; 118:1; 136:1; Jer 33:11) and are called upon to emulate this divine characteristic (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:27-36).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>love<\/em> is the heartbeat of the gospel. Perfect love flows among the Persons of the Trinity (Jn 3:35; 17:24). At Sinai God revealed himself as abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness (Ex 34:6-7), and all his covenantal relations with Abraham’s descendants showed his steadfast love. The chief manifestation of God’s love was the sending of his Son, Jesus Christ (Jn 3:16). The apostle John, who declared that “God is love,” pointed to the cross to indicate what that love really meant: “he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins” (1 Jn 4:8, 10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s love shown to undeserving sinners is called <em>grace<\/em> (Eph 1:6-8; 2:7-9; Ti 3:4). <em>Mercy<\/em> is God’s love (sometimes his goodness) shown to those in misery and distress. God is <em>longsuffering<\/em> or patient in his love; he gives time for repentance.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>holiness<\/em> depicts the moral purity and excellence of God. The description of Jesus’ holiness is applicable to each of the Persons of the Trinity: “holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners, exalted above the heavens” (Heb 7:26). The root idea of holiness is to be separate or set apart. Because of his inherent holiness, God is distinct from everything impure or unholy. God alone is holy; his name is holy, and he bears the name the “Holy One” (Pss 78:41; 89:18; 99:3, 9; 111:9; Is 12:6; Jer 51:5; Rv 15:4). Angels praise God’s holiness (Is 6:3; Rv 4:8). Objects, places, and people are called holy when set apart for the worship of God. Because God is holy, his people are called to holiness (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2; 1 Pt 1:14-15). God’s discipline of his people is aimed at making them share his holiness (Heb 12:10). The holiness of God is so prominent in Scripture that some have (mistakenly) regarded it as God’s chief attribute.<\/p>\n<h5>Volitional Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereignty<\/em> indicates the divine authority with which he rules the entire creation and in his sovereign good pleasure does whatever he wills. God is King over the entire creation, and he rules the destiny of human beings and nations. He restores his kingdom through Jesus Christ; the risen Lord revealed that all authority in heaven and on earth was given to him (Mt 28:18). Election to salvation in Christ is “according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph 1:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s sovereign will, though free, is not arbitrary; it is righteous and holy. He created the world and gave his law as the rule for his people’s lives; he covenants, blesses, and judges. God is the “King of kings and Lord of lords” (1 Tm 6:15); he calls all his subjects to obedient love (Dt 6:4-5; Mt 22:37-40; 1 Jn 5:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereign power<\/em> means that he is without bounds or limit in ability; he is <em>omnipotent<\/em> or almighty (Rv 4:8). By his powerful word, he created all things, and upholds “the universe by his word of power” (Heb 1:3). There is nothing too hard for the Lord God Almighty (Gn 18:14; Jer 32:27; Mt 19:26); he keeps his gracious covenant and fulfills all his promises (Lk 1:37; 2 Tm 2:13; Heb 6:18). The gospel is “the power of God for salvation” (Rom 1:16), for Christ is “the power of God” to save (1 Cor 1:24). Hence, believers must come to know “the immeasurable greatness of his power in us who believe, according to the working of his great might which he accomplished in Christ when he raised him from the dead and made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Glory<\/h5>\n<p>All the attributes of God are summarized in Scripture’s references to the <em>glory<\/em> of God. The majesty, splendor, beauty, and brilliance of God who dwells in unapproachable light are expressed by this indefinable term. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham (Acts 7:2); God showed his glory to Moses (Ex 33:18-19; 34:6-7). The God of the Lord Jesus Christ is the Father of glory (Eph 1:17). The heavens declare the glory of God (Ps 19:1); the majesty and glory of God fill heaven and earth (8:1). When finally every tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord, it will be for the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:11). Human beings were created for God’s glory, and Christian believers are instructed to do everything for the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31), thus reflecting in themselves his inherent glory.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOD, Being and Attributes of<\/h3>\n<p>Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Acts 14:16-17; 17:22-31). The fullest revelation of God’s attributes is seen in his work of redemption through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>How does Scripture express the characteristics of God? First, in the divine names by which God revealed himself (Gn 1:1; 2:4; 17:1; Ex 3:6, 14-15; 6:2-5). Some of God’s attributes are revealed implicitly in the biblical accounts of Creation, fall, Flood, Babel, and the exodus, and more fully in the various covenants God made with his people. To Israel, he identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Ex 3:15). To the pharaoh, he identified himself as the “God of Israel” or the “God of the Hebrews” (5:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>By the time the people of Israel had reached Mt Sinai, the revelation of God’s attributes in the biblical narrative had become more explicit: “The <span>Lord<\/span>, the <span>Lord<\/span>, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation” (Ex 34:6-7, <span>rsv<\/span>). This summary is repeated elsewhere with slight variations (Nm 14:18; Neh 9:17; Ps 103:8; Jer 32:18; Jon 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>• Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>• Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAttributesofGod\">The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>The historic Christian confessions refer to various characteristics of God without calling them attributes or classifying them. The Westminster Shorter Catechism (1647) shows a tendency toward classification, describing God as “a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.” The first four attributes qualify the others.<\/p>\n<p>Several ways of classifying the attributes have been suggested. Generally such schemes divide the divine attributes into pairs: negative and positive, natural and moral, absolute and relative, immanent and eminent, intransitive and transitive, quiescent and operative, antithetical and synthetical, or incommunicable and communicable. Roman Catholics prefer the distinction of negative and positive, or natural and moral. Lutherans generally favor the distinction between quiescent and operative attributes. Reformed and evangelical scholars usually distinguish incommunicable and communicable attributes. Karl Barth grouped the attributes under freedom and love, and then proposed pairs of attributes that reflect freedom-love or love-freedom. In spite of the diversity of labels given the groups of attributes, surprising agreement exists in the attributes listed under each group.<\/p>\n<p>This article will make a distinction between incommunicable and communicable attributes without considering the classification itself as significant. No classification of God’s attributes is fully satisfactory. The <em>incommunicable<\/em> attributes emphasize the absolute distinctness of God, his transcendent greatness and exalted nature. Such attributes have little or no analogy in God’s creatures. The <em>communicable<\/em> attributes find some reflection or analogy in human beings created in God’s image. They indicate the immanence of God in relation to creatures. Yet all the attributes are God’s attributes; the distinction between God and man, between Creator and creature, is always basic.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IncommunicableAttributes\">Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Acknowledging some diversity of theological opinion, the following attributes will be considered incommunicable: unity, spirituality, independence, immutability, eternity, and immensity. In addition, the incomprehensibility of God must be mentioned.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>incomprehensibility<\/em> is sometimes included in lists of his attributes. It seems preferable to regard it as a description of human inability to understand God fully. Incomprehensibility is therefore not an attribute, although it is a given in every discussion of God. Through his revelation God is truly known by faith, yet no creature will ever comprehend God the Creator. Likewise, no one will ever fully understand any one of God’s attributes. Acknowledgment of God’s incomprehensibility should contribute to a spirit of humility in every consideration of God and his attributes (Pss 139:6; 145:3; Is 40:28; 55:8-9; Mt 11:25-27; Rom 11:33-36; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 13:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>unity<\/em> is an expression of monotheism—the fact that the God of Scripture is the only, living, true God (Dt 6:4; Mk 12:29; Jn 17:3). All other gods are idols and figments of human imagination. This attribute is reflected in the first commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me” (Ex 20:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>spirituality<\/em> indicates that God is not physical and is invisible. Positively it means that God is personal, living, self-conscious, and self-determining. The invisible God cannot be seen by human eyes (Ex 33:20), so the second commandment forbids every visible representation of God (20:4). Because God is Spirit, he must be worshiped in spirit and in truth (Jn 4:24).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>independence<\/em> or self-existence indicates that he is not dependent upon anything outside himself. He is self-sufficient in his existence, in his decrees, and in all his works. God has “life in himself” (Jn 5:26) and “he himself gives life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:25). To Israel, he revealed himself as the “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Ex 3:14), and he made Israel a covenant people for his own possession. God continues to work out his will in the world, and even though he uses various means, his independence remains intact. Thus, he enters into fellowship with his covenant people, and he publishes the gospel through human agents.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immutability<\/em> or constancy expresses his changelessness and his faithfulness to himself, to his decrees, promises, and works. He remains forever the same true God who undergoes no change from within or from anything outside himself. And so in James 1:17 we read: “Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change” (<span>rsv<\/span>). God’s oath to Abraham expressed his immutability so that his covenant people could be sure of the “unchangeable character of his purpose” (Heb 6:17). Samuel told King Saul that the Lord would not “change his mind; for he is not a man” (1 Sm 15:29, <span>niv<\/span>; cf. Nm 23:19). “For I the <span>Lord<\/span> do not change” (Mal 3:6). That was God’s explanation for not destroying sinful Judah; he shows mercy and keeps his covenant. Because “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever,” Christians are warned not to be “led by diverse and strange teachings” (Heb 13:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>God’s immutability or constancy does not imply that he is static or immobile. He is a dynamic, living God who is constantly working (Jn 5:17). Sometimes God is described as being sorry, repenting, or changing his mind (Gn 6:6-7; 1 Sm 15:11; Jon 3:10). In their contexts, such figurative expressions show the constancy of a God who, in holiness and righteousness, always abhors sin and reacts against it. In his grace and mercy, he forgives the penitent, and he carries out his promises without fail (Ps 110:4; Is 46:10; Jer 18:7-10; Eph 1:11). Thus, the constancy of God is significant in all human relationships with him, including petitions offered in prayer.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>eternity<\/em> indicates his transcendence over time. He is timeless and everlasting. He has no beginning or end; he does not undergo growth, development, or maturation. He existed before the creation of the world; he dwells now in eternity; he will continue as the eternal God even when history ends. Scripture speaks of God as “eternal” (Dt 33:27), “the King” (1 Tm 1:17), “the beginning and the end” (Rv 22:13). He “inhabits eternity” (Is 57:15) and his “years have no end” (Ps 102:27; cf. 2 Pt 3:8). Although God is above time and is timeless, time is his creation and history is the arena of his work. “When the time had fully come God sent forth his Son” (Gal 4:4); Jesus Christ died on a Friday and rose on the third day.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immensity<\/em> and <em>omnipresence<\/em> express his transcendence over space. God fills heaven and earth (Jer 23:23-24). Heaven is his throne, and the earth his footstool, so he is not restricted to a temple building (Is 66:1; Acts 17:24). Yet God is immanent in this world and is actively at work in it to establish his kingdom. No one can hide from the omnipresent God (Ps 139:6-12). Jesus promised, “I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:20). Since Pentecost (Acts 2), the Holy Spirit is said actually to dwell within the bodies of believers (1 Cor 6:19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CommunicableAttributes\">Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Many attributes of God can be classified under this heading, although it is sometimes difficult to say which biblical references to God should be regarded as attributes. A rich diversity of terminology is found in Scripture, with many synonyms. For convenience, the communicable attributes are often classified as intellectual, moral, and volitional.<\/p>\n<h5>Intellectual Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>knowledge<\/em> indicates that in a unique way God knows himself and all things possible and actual. <em>Omniscience<\/em> means that “he knows everything” (1 Jn 3:20). “Even before a word is on my tongue, lo, O <span>Lord<\/span>, thou knowest it altogether” (Ps 139:4), including the secret thoughts of a person’s heart. God’s righteous judgment is rooted in the fact that he “knows the thoughts of man” (Ps 94:11). Acknowledging that God’s omniscience is incomprehensible, the psalmist finds it a source of comfort (139:1-5). All the “treasures of wisdom and knowledge” are hidden in Christ (Col 2:3); therefore, the Christian is told to bring every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Cor 10:5). Christian sanctification includes renewal in knowledge to become more like Christ (Col 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>wisdom<\/em> indicates that he uses his knowledge in the best possible manner to achieve his goals. God’s works are varied, but they are all done in wisdom (Ps 104:24). “The <span>Lord<\/span> by wisdom founded the earth” (Prv 3:19); his providence also displays his wisdom (Gn 50:20). Redemption through Jesus Christ reveals God’s wisdom (1 Cor 1:24) and awakens awe and praise (Rom 11:33-36). Human beings should seek wisdom (Prv 3:21)—wisdom rooted in the fear of God (Jb 28:28; Ps 111:10; Prv 9:10). Christians are said to be “wise in Christ” (1 Cor 4:10), and Christ charges them to act wisely (Mt 10:16), thus emulating the wisdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>veracity<\/em> expresses his truthfulness and faithfulness. He is the truth and he is faithful to himself, to his Word, and to his promises (2 Tm 2:13). “God is light and in him is no darkness at all” (1 Jn 1:5); therefore, his followers are to walk in the light (vv 6-7). Jesus is “the way, and the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6); hence, Christians are to walk in the truth and show faithfulness in their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Moral Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>The most comprehensive description of God’s moral character is his <em>goodness.<\/em> God deals bountifully and kindly with all his creatures. He is “good to all” (Ps 145:9). Jesus insisted that “no one is good but God alone” (Mk 10:18; Lk 18:19). The redeemed praise God for his goodness (1 Chr 16:34; 2 Chr 5:13; Pss 106:1; 107:1; 118:1; 136:1; Jer 33:11) and are called upon to emulate this divine characteristic (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:27-36).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>love<\/em> is the heartbeat of the gospel. Perfect love flows among the Persons of the Trinity (Jn 3:35; 17:24). At Sinai God revealed himself as abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness (Ex 34:6-7), and all his covenantal relations with Abraham’s descendants showed his steadfast love. The chief manifestation of God’s love was the sending of his Son, Jesus Christ (Jn 3:16). The apostle John, who declared that “God is love,” pointed to the cross to indicate what that love really meant: “he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins” (1 Jn 4:8, 10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s love shown to undeserving sinners is called <em>grace<\/em> (Eph 1:6-8; 2:7-9; Ti 3:4). <em>Mercy<\/em> is God’s love (sometimes his goodness) shown to those in misery and distress. God is <em>longsuffering<\/em> or patient in his love; he gives time for repentance.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>holiness<\/em> depicts the moral purity and excellence of God. The description of Jesus’ holiness is applicable to each of the Persons of the Trinity: “holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners, exalted above the heavens” (Heb 7:26). The root idea of holiness is to be separate or set apart. Because of his inherent holiness, God is distinct from everything impure or unholy. God alone is holy; his name is holy, and he bears the name the “Holy One” (Pss 78:41; 89:18; 99:3, 9; 111:9; Is 12:6; Jer 51:5; Rv 15:4). Angels praise God’s holiness (Is 6:3; Rv 4:8). Objects, places, and people are called holy when set apart for the worship of God. Because God is holy, his people are called to holiness (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2; 1 Pt 1:14-15). God’s discipline of his people is aimed at making them share his holiness (Heb 12:10). The holiness of God is so prominent in Scripture that some have (mistakenly) regarded it as God’s chief attribute.<\/p>\n<h5>Volitional Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereignty<\/em> indicates the divine authority with which he rules the entire creation and in his sovereign good pleasure does whatever he wills. God is King over the entire creation, and he rules the destiny of human beings and nations. He restores his kingdom through Jesus Christ; the risen Lord revealed that all authority in heaven and on earth was given to him (Mt 28:18). Election to salvation in Christ is “according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph 1:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s sovereign will, though free, is not arbitrary; it is righteous and holy. He created the world and gave his law as the rule for his people’s lives; he covenants, blesses, and judges. God is the “King of kings and Lord of lords” (1 Tm 6:15); he calls all his subjects to obedient love (Dt 6:4-5; Mt 22:37-40; 1 Jn 5:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereign power<\/em> means that he is without bounds or limit in ability; he is <em>omnipotent<\/em> or almighty (Rv 4:8). By his powerful word, he created all things, and upholds “the universe by his word of power” (Heb 1:3). There is nothing too hard for the Lord God Almighty (Gn 18:14; Jer 32:27; Mt 19:26); he keeps his gracious covenant and fulfills all his promises (Lk 1:37; 2 Tm 2:13; Heb 6:18). The gospel is “the power of God for salvation” (Rom 1:16), for Christ is “the power of God” to save (1 Cor 1:24). Hence, believers must come to know “the immeasurable greatness of his power in us who believe, according to the working of his great might which he accomplished in Christ when he raised him from the dead and made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Glory<\/h5>\n<p>All the attributes of God are summarized in Scripture’s references to the <em>glory<\/em> of God. The majesty, splendor, beauty, and brilliance of God who dwells in unapproachable light are expressed by this indefinable term. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham (Acts 7:2); God showed his glory to Moses (Ex 33:18-19; 34:6-7). The God of the Lord Jesus Christ is the Father of glory (Eph 1:17). The heavens declare the glory of God (Ps 19:1); the majesty and glory of God fill heaven and earth (8:1). When finally every tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord, it will be for the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:11). Human beings were created for God’s glory, and Christian believers are instructed to do everything for the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31), thus reflecting in themselves his inherent glory.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOD, Being and Attributes of Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption. According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Ac...","summary_en":"GOD, Being and Attributes of Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption. According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Ac...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14418,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gods and Goddesses","title_en":"Gods and Goddesses","content_ro":"<h3>GODS AND GODDESSES<\/h3>\n<p>Male and female deities worshiped by pagans. Although the Bible teaches that there is only one God (Is 45:18, 21-22; Mk 12:32), heathen people in ancient times quickly developed a belief in large numbers of so-called gods (Jer 10:11) and goddesses. Eventually each nation created and worshiped its own deities, usually more than one. Many of these “foreign gods” (1 Sm 7:3) are named in the Bible, and in most cases we are told to what nation each belonged. The list from Mesopotamia, a center of idol worship, is the longest: Adrammelech and Anammelech (2 Kgs 17:31), Bel (also known as Marduk, Is 46:1; Jer 50:2; 51:44), Kaiwan (Am 5:26), Nebo or Nabu (Is 46:1), Nergal (2 Kgs 17:30), Nisroch (19:37; Is 37:38), Rephan (Acts 7:43), Sakkuth (Am 5:26), Succoth-benoth (2 Kgs 17:30), Tammuz (Ez 8:14), and Tartak (2 Kgs 17:31). The Syrians were devoted to Ashima (v 30) and Rimmon (5:18), who was also worshiped under the compound name Hadad-rimmon (Zec 12:11). Israel’s eastern neighbors, Ammon and Moab, worshiped Milcom or Molech (1 Kgs 11:5-7, 33; 2 Kgs 23:13) and Chemosh, respectively, although the Moabites also worshiped a local manifestation of Baal (Nm 25:3-5). The Philistine gods were Dagon and Baal-zebub (2 Kgs 1:2-3, 6, 16), who is the equivalent of the NT Beelzebul (Mt 12:24; Lk 11:15). One Canaanite god, Baal, and two Canaanite goddesses, Asherah and Ashtoreth, are mentioned frequently in the OT; Ashtoreth was the same as the Mesopotamian Ishtar, also known as the “Queen of Heaven” (Jer 7:18; 44:17-19, 25). The gods of Egypt are represented by only two names in the Bible: Amon (Jer 46:25) and Apis (v 15). Nibhaz (2 Kgs 17:31) was probably an Elamite god.<\/p>\n<p>At least three Greco-Roman deities are mentioned in the NT: the Greek goddess Artemis (Acts 19:24-28, 34-35), known as Diana by the Romans, and the Greek gods Zeus and Hermes (Acts 14:12-13), known as Jupiter and Mercury, respectively, by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible clearly teaches that the gods of the nations have no objective reality (Jer 2:11), even though their worshipers sincerely believe that they actually exist (v 28). But the Lord proclaims that “they are no gods,” (Jer 2:11; 16:20) or “gods that are not gods” (5:7, <span>niv<\/span>). The NT further declares of idols that “an idol has no real existence” (1 Cor 8:4) and that “gods made with hands are not gods” (Acts 19:26). It is not surprising, then, that when the Israelites began to encounter other nations in significant ways—that is, as early as the time of the exodus—they were told repeatedly that the Lord is greater than all other gods (Ex 15:11; 18:11; Dt 10:17; 1 Chr 16:25; 2 Chr 2:5; Pss 86:8; 95:3; 96:4-5; 97:7-9; 135:5, 136:2; Dn 2:47; Zep 2:11).<\/p>\n<p>Such so-called gods were not worthy of Israel’s attention or veneration. Since there is only one God, other gods could not claim and did not deserve Israel’s worship (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7). The Hebrew language did not even have a word for “goddess” and therefore had to use its word for “god” to express that concept (see 1 Kgs 11:5, 33). The Israelites were to make no images (Ex 20:4, 23; Lv 19:4; Dt 5:8) or mention (Ex 23:13; Jos 23:7) of the gods and goddesses of their heathen neighbors.<\/p>\n<p>Yet despite all God’s warnings, idolatry was Israel’s besetting sin from the earliest times. During the patriarchal period, God’s people were attracted to the “household idols” (Gn 31:32) of their relatives, and they continued to worship other gods throughout most of their history (Ex 32:1-4, 8, 23, 31; 34:15; Hos 11:2). Idolatry eventually led to the destruction of the northern kingdom (2 Kgs 17:7-18) in 722 <span>BC<\/span> and of the southern kingdom (2 Kgs 22:17; cf. Dt 29:25-28) in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. During their time of exile in Babylonia, the Jewish people saw idolatry at its worst and turned away from it, but their ancestors could have avoided untold agony if they had simply followed the example of Joshua: “As for me and my house, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (Jos 24:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Idols, Idolatry; High Place.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GODS AND GODDESSES<\/h3>\n<p>Male and female deities worshiped by pagans. Although the Bible teaches that there is only one God (Is 45:18, 21-22; Mk 12:32), heathen people in ancient times quickly developed a belief in large numbers of so-called gods (Jer 10:11) and goddesses. Eventually each nation created and worshiped its own deities, usually more than one. Many of these “foreign gods” (1 Sm 7:3) are named in the Bible, and in most cases we are told to what nation each belonged. The list from Mesopotamia, a center of idol worship, is the longest: Adrammelech and Anammelech (2 Kgs 17:31), Bel (also known as Marduk, Is 46:1; Jer 50:2; 51:44), Kaiwan (Am 5:26), Nebo or Nabu (Is 46:1), Nergal (2 Kgs 17:30), Nisroch (19:37; Is 37:38), Rephan (Acts 7:43), Sakkuth (Am 5:26), Succoth-benoth (2 Kgs 17:30), Tammuz (Ez 8:14), and Tartak (2 Kgs 17:31). The Syrians were devoted to Ashima (v 30) and Rimmon (5:18), who was also worshiped under the compound name Hadad-rimmon (Zec 12:11). Israel’s eastern neighbors, Ammon and Moab, worshiped Milcom or Molech (1 Kgs 11:5-7, 33; 2 Kgs 23:13) and Chemosh, respectively, although the Moabites also worshiped a local manifestation of Baal (Nm 25:3-5). The Philistine gods were Dagon and Baal-zebub (2 Kgs 1:2-3, 6, 16), who is the equivalent of the NT Beelzebul (Mt 12:24; Lk 11:15). One Canaanite god, Baal, and two Canaanite goddesses, Asherah and Ashtoreth, are mentioned frequently in the OT; Ashtoreth was the same as the Mesopotamian Ishtar, also known as the “Queen of Heaven” (Jer 7:18; 44:17-19, 25). The gods of Egypt are represented by only two names in the Bible: Amon (Jer 46:25) and Apis (v 15). Nibhaz (2 Kgs 17:31) was probably an Elamite god.<\/p>\n<p>At least three Greco-Roman deities are mentioned in the NT: the Greek goddess Artemis (Acts 19:24-28, 34-35), known as Diana by the Romans, and the Greek gods Zeus and Hermes (Acts 14:12-13), known as Jupiter and Mercury, respectively, by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible clearly teaches that the gods of the nations have no objective reality (Jer 2:11), even though their worshipers sincerely believe that they actually exist (v 28). But the Lord proclaims that “they are no gods,” (Jer 2:11; 16:20) or “gods that are not gods” (5:7, <span>niv<\/span>). The NT further declares of idols that “an idol has no real existence” (1 Cor 8:4) and that “gods made with hands are not gods” (Acts 19:26). It is not surprising, then, that when the Israelites began to encounter other nations in significant ways—that is, as early as the time of the exodus—they were told repeatedly that the Lord is greater than all other gods (Ex 15:11; 18:11; Dt 10:17; 1 Chr 16:25; 2 Chr 2:5; Pss 86:8; 95:3; 96:4-5; 97:7-9; 135:5, 136:2; Dn 2:47; Zep 2:11).<\/p>\n<p>Such so-called gods were not worthy of Israel’s attention or veneration. Since there is only one God, other gods could not claim and did not deserve Israel’s worship (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7). The Hebrew language did not even have a word for “goddess” and therefore had to use its word for “god” to express that concept (see 1 Kgs 11:5, 33). The Israelites were to make no images (Ex 20:4, 23; Lv 19:4; Dt 5:8) or mention (Ex 23:13; Jos 23:7) of the gods and goddesses of their heathen neighbors.<\/p>\n<p>Yet despite all God’s warnings, idolatry was Israel’s besetting sin from the earliest times. During the patriarchal period, God’s people were attracted to the “household idols” (Gn 31:32) of their relatives, and they continued to worship other gods throughout most of their history (Ex 32:1-4, 8, 23, 31; 34:15; Hos 11:2). Idolatry eventually led to the destruction of the northern kingdom (2 Kgs 17:7-18) in 722 <span>BC<\/span> and of the southern kingdom (2 Kgs 22:17; cf. Dt 29:25-28) in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. During their time of exile in Babylonia, the Jewish people saw idolatry at its worst and turned away from it, but their ancestors could have avoided untold agony if they had simply followed the example of Joshua: “As for me and my house, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (Jos 24:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Idols, Idolatry; High Place.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GODS AND GODDESSES Male and female deities worshiped by pagans. Although the Bible teaches that there is only one God (Is 45:18, 21-22; Mk 12:32), heathen people in ancient times quickly developed a belief in large numbers of so-called gods (Jer 10:11) and goddesses. Eventually each nation created and worshiped its own deities, usually more than one. Many of these “foreign gods” (1 Sm 7:3) are named in the Bible, and in most cases we are told to what nation each belonged. The list from Mesopo...","summary_en":"GODS AND GODDESSES Male and female deities worshiped by pagans. Although the Bible teaches that there is only one God (Is 45:18, 21-22; Mk 12:32), heathen people in ancient times quickly developed a belief in large numbers of so-called gods (Jer 10:11) and goddesses. Eventually each nation created and worshiped its own deities, usually more than one. Many of these “foreign gods” (1 Sm 7:3) are named in the Bible, and in most cases we are told to what nation each belonged. The list from Mesopo...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43837,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:3","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:3-17<\/strong> The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did not incorporate such absolute prohibitions, probably because polytheism mitigated against absolute principles. In contrast, covenants with a king did include absolute prohibitions because a single king could demand whatever he wished of his subjects. Here the single king is the sole Creator of the universe, who truly has authority to state absolute principles, demands, and prohibitions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:3-17<\/strong> The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did not incorporate such absolute prohibitions, probably because polytheism mitigated against absolute principles. In contrast, covenants with a king did include absolute prohibitions because a single king could demand whatever he wished of his subjects. Here the single king is the sole Creator of the universe, who truly has authority to state absolute principles, demands, and prohibitions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:3-17 The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did no...","summary_en":"20:3-17 The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did no...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43838,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:3","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:3-11<\/strong> The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:3-11<\/strong> The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:3-11 The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.","summary_en":"20:3-11 The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43839,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:3","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:3<\/strong> Not recognizing <em>any other god<\/em> is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:3<\/strong> Not recognizing <em>any other god<\/em> is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:3 Not recognizing any other god is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).","summary_en":"20:3 Not recognizing any other god is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71463,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:3","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:3-17<\/strong> The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did not incorporate such absolute prohibitions, probably because polytheism mitigated against absolute principles. In contrast, covenants with a king did include absolute prohibitions because a single king could demand whatever he wished of his subjects. Here the single king is the sole Creator of the universe, who truly has authority to state absolute principles, demands, and prohibitions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:3-17<\/strong> The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did not incorporate such absolute prohibitions, probably because polytheism mitigated against absolute principles. In contrast, covenants with a king did include absolute prohibitions because a single king could demand whatever he wished of his subjects. Here the single king is the sole Creator of the universe, who truly has authority to state absolute principles, demands, and prohibitions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:3-17 The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did no...","summary_en":"20:3-17 The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did no...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71464,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:3","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:3-11<\/strong> The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:3-11<\/strong> The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:3-11 The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.","summary_en":"20:3-11 The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71465,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:3","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:3<\/strong> Not recognizing <em>any other god<\/em> is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:3<\/strong> Not recognizing <em>any other god<\/em> is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:3 Not recognizing any other god is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).","summary_en":"20:3 Not recognizing any other god is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99089,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:3","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:3-17<\/strong> The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did not incorporate such absolute prohibitions, probably because polytheism mitigated against absolute principles. In contrast, covenants with a king did include absolute prohibitions because a single king could demand whatever he wished of his subjects. Here the single king is the sole Creator of the universe, who truly has authority to state absolute principles, demands, and prohibitions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:3-17<\/strong> The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did not incorporate such absolute prohibitions, probably because polytheism mitigated against absolute principles. In contrast, covenants with a king did include absolute prohibitions because a single king could demand whatever he wished of his subjects. Here the single king is the sole Creator of the universe, who truly has authority to state absolute principles, demands, and prohibitions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:3-17 The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did no...","summary_en":"20:3-17 The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did no...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99090,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:3","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:3-11<\/strong> The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:3-11<\/strong> The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:3-11 The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.","summary_en":"20:3-11 The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99091,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:3","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:3<\/strong> Not recognizing <em>any other god<\/em> is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:3<\/strong> Not recognizing <em>any other god<\/em> is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:3 Not recognizing any other god is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).","summary_en":"20:3 Not recognizing any other god is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126715,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:3","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:3-17<\/strong> The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did not incorporate such absolute prohibitions, probably because polytheism mitigated against absolute principles. In contrast, covenants with a king did include absolute prohibitions because a single king could demand whatever he wished of his subjects. Here the single king is the sole Creator of the universe, who truly has authority to state absolute principles, demands, and prohibitions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:3-17<\/strong> The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did not incorporate such absolute prohibitions, probably because polytheism mitigated against absolute principles. In contrast, covenants with a king did include absolute prohibitions because a single king could demand whatever he wished of his subjects. Here the single king is the sole Creator of the universe, who truly has authority to state absolute principles, demands, and prohibitions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:3-17 The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did no...","summary_en":"20:3-17 The terms of the covenant specify the behavior the people were expected to manifest if they were to be in a covenant with God. Only the first four instructions (20:2-11) relate directly to God, while the remaining six (20:12-17) have to do with human-to-human relationships. A covenant with God stipulates how we are to treat each other because God is profoundly ethical, and he expects us to manifest his character in all our relationships. Other law codes in the ancient Near East did no...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126716,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:3","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:3-11<\/strong> The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:3-11<\/strong> The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:3-11 The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.","summary_en":"20:3-11 The first four commandments relate to one’s relationship with God. Observing them would foster a correct understanding of God in contrast to the idolatrous notions of deity that the Israelites had encountered in Egypt and would yet encounter in Canaan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126717,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:3","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:3<\/strong> Not recognizing <em>any other god<\/em> is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:3<\/strong> Not recognizing <em>any other god<\/em> is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:3 Not recognizing any other god is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).","summary_en":"20:3 Not recognizing any other god is the first step toward learning the truth that there are no other gods besides the Lord (see Deut 4:35; 6:4; Isa 43:10-11; 45:21-22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64128,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91754,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119380,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147006,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":6998,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Coins","title_en":"Coins","content_ro":"<h3>COINS<\/h3>\n<p>Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>• Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>• Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarliestCoinsinPalestine\">Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>Not until the time of Darius the Great (Darius I of Persia, 521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) did an official government-sponsored coinage become current in Palestine. Those earliest coins were oval-shaped gold darics, along with some silver coins.<\/p>\n<p>“Dram” is another term for the Persian gold daric. It is mentioned in Ezra 2:68-69 (<span>kjv<\/span>), where Zerubbabel’s caravan offered gold darics amounting to $30,000 toward rebuilding the temple. This passage is the first mention of an actual coin in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Almost at the same time that the Persian coins became current in Palestine, the widely popular silver tetradrachmas (four-drachma pieces) of Athens began to find their way to the mercantile centers of the Phoenician, Israelite, and Philistine coasts. Archaeologists have unearthed them in hoards throughout the eastern Mediterranean region. They continued to be used through the Persian period, which lasted until the Persian Empire was conquered by Alexander the Great in 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>. The coin was thick and heavy in appearance, but being of high-quality silver, it was in great demand for international commerce. Presumably Greek merchants found they could obtain the most desirable Asiatic imports in exchange for that particular form of currency.<\/p>\n<p>The silver didrachma, or half-drachma, in general use in the Greek Empire from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>, continued through Roman times. After Alexander’s conquests, of course, Greek coins were used throughout the Macedonian Empire from present-day Yugoslavia to Pakistan. They were almost certainly employed for business purposes in Judea, for example.<\/p>\n<p>The shekels of the Phoenician trade centers of Tyre and Sidon, which had contributed substantially to the money supply in the Persian period, continued to be accepted in Judea even after the Alexandrian conquest. Typical of Sidon was a silver shekel portraying the battlements and walls of Sidon’s harbor, with a ship lying at anchor and two prancing lions in the foreground. A typical Tyrian shekel showed the god Baal robed and wearing a tiara. He was riding a hippocamp (winged horse with the tail of a fish) on the sea, with a fish or dolphin beneath. The reverse showed an Egyptian-type owl facing right, plus a shepherd’s crook and flail, both royal insignia in Egypt. The stater (or tetradrachma) found by the disciple Peter in a fish’s mouth and used to pay the temple tax for himself and Jesus may have been a Tyrian coin (Mt 17:27; <span>rsv<\/span> “shekel”).<\/p>\n<p>The talent, which represented a certain weight of gold or silver, was a common medium of exchange before the development of coinage. During the Maccabean period, John Hyrcanus saved the city of Jerusalem from destruction in 133 <span>BC<\/span> by paying a ransom from a 900-year-old hoard stored in David’s sepulcher. Three thousand talents of silver were sent to the Seleucid king Antiochus VII Sidetes in return for his promise to withdraw his troops. Treasure plundered from the temple by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is recorded as amounting to 17 talents. In gold talents that sum would represent the equivalent of the purchase price of about 15 large houses in a modern Western city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CoinagefromtheMaccabeestoHerodAgrippaI\">Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>Even though a native Jewish dynasty assumed the government of the Holy Land, it was many years before any indigenous Jewish coinage was minted. Presumably the inhabitants continued to use the coinage of Tyre and Egypt and of the Seleucid Empire for their commercial transactions. It was formerly supposed that silver shekels bearing images of the chalice and pomegranate cluster dated from the reign of Simon Maccabeus (142–134 <span>BC<\/span>); more recent archaeological discoveries prove that those coins date from the first Jewish revolt (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>When the time came to issue the first Jewish coins, the die makers faced several problems. No mint was available, and no local people were skilled in design or die sinking. Coins current in the Near East at that time, which showed a high degree of design and craftsmanship, each bore the portrait head of a ruler or a god. For the Jews to make such coins would have meant contravening the second commandment, “You shall not make for yourself a graven image” (Ex 20:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). Not until well into Roman times was a coin struck in Palestine bearing a portrait head of a Roman emperor.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest coinage of the Hasmonean dynasty (the regnal name of the Maccabees) was the small bronze lepton (plural, lepta) of John Hyrcanus I (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>), son of Simon Maccabeus. The obverse showed two cornucopias with a pomegranate between them. That image symbolized the fertility that God had granted to the land. The reverse contained an inscription within a wreath, “John the high priest and the community of the Jews.” Small bronze lepta from the reign of Alexander Janneus, son of Hyrcanus I, have been found in great numbers. They were evidently much in demand for transactions at the temple, where money changers converted the gentile currency of visiting worshipers into the more acceptable Jewish money. Undoubtedly Hasmonean lepta were the coins Jesus scattered over the pavement of the Court of the Gentiles when he overturned the tables of the money changers (Mt 21:12; Jn 2:15). The lepton, or “mite,” of bronze or copper, worth <span>1<\/span>\/<span>400<\/span> of a shekel, was mentioned by Jesus on another occasion. He praised a widow’s gift of two mites to the temple treasury with the comment that the rich “contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, her whole living” (Mk 12:44, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Herod I came to power in Judea under the patronage of Mark Antony and secured the allegiance of the pro-Hasmonean Jews by marrying Mariamne, granddaughter of Hyrcanus II, in 38 <span>BC<\/span>. Herod was empowered to strike his own bronze coins. Although he had a free hand to introduce innovations, Herod’s lepta followed tradition quite faithfully. The lepta carried an anchor with letters meaning “Of King Herod.” The reverse bore the double cornucopias with a pomegranate (or poppy) between them. Herod also minted a large bronze coin with what appears to be a Macedonian helmet on the obverse and a slender tripod on the reverse, along with an inscription of Herod’s name. Other designs he employed included wheat, eagles, and wreaths. He issued no silver coinage, relying instead on the available supplies of silver coins from Tyre, Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, and Rome.<\/p>\n<p>After Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, his son Herod Archelaus assumed control. Lepta from that period bore a hanging cluster of grapes with a Greek inscription, and on the reverse a two-plumed Macedonian helmet. Grapes were an allusion to Israel as the Lord’s vine (Is 5).<\/p>\n<p>When Herod Antipas began his rule, also in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, he had no authority in Judea or Samaria. That portion of the former Jewish kingdom was placed under the control of Roman governors, or procurators, appointed directly by the emperor himself. Most familiar of the Roman procurators of Judea was Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36). His bronze coinage showed some bold innovations; his designs included representations of instruments used in the Roman religion such as the augur’s wand (resembling a shepherd’s crook in shape) and a ladle used in connection with broth prepared at sacrifices. The reverse bore a wreath enclosing the regnal date of <span>AD<\/span> 30–31. The two lepta put into the temple treasury (Lk 21:2) could have been lepta issued by Pilate or his predecessor. More likely, however, they were the Hasmonean lepta of Hyrcanus or Janneus, which were free of any taint of pagan Roman influence.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44), grandson of Herod the Great, continued the family tradition of ingratiating himself with the Roman overlords. Many of Herod Agrippa’s lepta have been found, showing a conical tasseled umbrella (perhaps symbolizing his royal protection of the people of Palestine) plus a Greek inscription indicating his reign. The reverse showed a bound cluster of three wheat ears and bore the regnal year as the legend.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RomanCoinsinNewTestamentTimes\">Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman “as” came into circulation about 348 <span>BC<\/span> as a bronze coin bearing the figure of an animal. The coin was named after the Roman one-pound weight, equivalent to 12 ounces (340 grams) in our modern system. At the time of Christ’s birth, the Roman “as” minted for use in the Asiatic provinces bore the head of the emperor Augustus, with a laurel wreath on the reverse. A smaller bronze quadrans, or quarter “as,” was also minted by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Another bronze coin found in Greek and Roman currency was the assarion, first minted in the first century <span>BC<\/span> but still in use in the Christian period. One type was stamped with a winged sphinx, with an amphora on the reverse. It is still debated whether the coin described as a “farthing” in the <span>kjv<\/span> was in fact a Greek assarion or a Roman “as” or quadrans. The coin is mentioned four times in the NT, most familiarly in the question “Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing?” (see Mt 5:26; 10:29; Mk 12:42; Lk 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> “penny”). There is no doubt that the <span>kjv<\/span> translators decided to make the coin seem more familiar to their readers by using the name of the smallest copper coin in circulation in England at that time.<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “penny” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is the Greek form of “denarius,” the normal daily wage for a laborer in NT times. In the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, for example, the master agreed to pay each man “a penny” for his day’s work (Mt 20:2, <span>kjv<\/span>; <span>rsv<\/span> “a denarius”). “Two pence” was the amount paid to the innkeeper by the good Samaritan (Lk 10:35, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because of the influence of the Roman denarius on British currency, the English penny has always been represented by the initial letter of its Roman equivalent.<\/p>\n<p>When the denarius, or “penny,” is recognized as a normal day’s wage, the astonishment of Jesus’ disciples when they were expected to find food for 5,000 people is better understood. They exclaimed that “two hundred pennyworth” of food would not feed such a crowd (Jn 6:7, <span>kjv<\/span>); that sum represented more than six months’ work.<\/p>\n<p>As might be expected, the silver and gold coinage current in Palestine during the time of Christ and for the remainder of the first century <span>AD<\/span> came primarily from Rome. The larger silver coins, however, that are referred to as tetradrachmas or staters in the NT came from Egypt, Phoenicia, or Antioch. The silver coin most frequently mentioned in the NT was the Roman denarius or the Greek drachma. Since few drachmas have been found in excavations dating from the first century, it is possible that the term was used in popular speech to refer to the denarius (plural, denarii), which was approximately the same size as the average Greek drachma. Actually, few Greek cities were permitted by their Roman overlords to continue minting drachmas.<\/p>\n<p>Caesar Augustus issued a decree for all the Roman world to be enrolled (Lk 2:1-2) in an empire-wide census just about the time that Jesus was born (6 or 5 <span>BC<\/span>). During his long reign (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14), Augustus authorized a large variety of denarii. They generally carried his likeness on their obverse with the inscription “Augustus, son of the divine one” (that is, son of Julius Caesar, who had been voted divine honors by the Roman Senate).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew 22:19 Jesus asked those trying to trick him with a question to show him a coin used to pay the government tax. They handed him a denarius bearing the portrait and inscription of Caesar (Mt 22:21). That coin could have been a denarius of Augustus, who had died some 16 years before, or of Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37), who was then on the throne. The silver denarius of Tiberius read “Tiberius Caesar Augustus, son of the divine Augustus.” The reverse showed the high priestess of the vestal order, flaming torch in hand, seated on her throne facing right. The title “pontif(ex) maxim(us)” referred to Tiberius rather than to the priestess.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals; Money; Money Changer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COINS<\/h3>\n<p>Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>• Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>• Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarliestCoinsinPalestine\">Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>Not until the time of Darius the Great (Darius I of Persia, 521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) did an official government-sponsored coinage become current in Palestine. Those earliest coins were oval-shaped gold darics, along with some silver coins.<\/p>\n<p>“Dram” is another term for the Persian gold daric. It is mentioned in Ezra 2:68-69 (<span>kjv<\/span>), where Zerubbabel’s caravan offered gold darics amounting to $30,000 toward rebuilding the temple. This passage is the first mention of an actual coin in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Almost at the same time that the Persian coins became current in Palestine, the widely popular silver tetradrachmas (four-drachma pieces) of Athens began to find their way to the mercantile centers of the Phoenician, Israelite, and Philistine coasts. Archaeologists have unearthed them in hoards throughout the eastern Mediterranean region. They continued to be used through the Persian period, which lasted until the Persian Empire was conquered by Alexander the Great in 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>. The coin was thick and heavy in appearance, but being of high-quality silver, it was in great demand for international commerce. Presumably Greek merchants found they could obtain the most desirable Asiatic imports in exchange for that particular form of currency.<\/p>\n<p>The silver didrachma, or half-drachma, in general use in the Greek Empire from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>, continued through Roman times. After Alexander’s conquests, of course, Greek coins were used throughout the Macedonian Empire from present-day Yugoslavia to Pakistan. They were almost certainly employed for business purposes in Judea, for example.<\/p>\n<p>The shekels of the Phoenician trade centers of Tyre and Sidon, which had contributed substantially to the money supply in the Persian period, continued to be accepted in Judea even after the Alexandrian conquest. Typical of Sidon was a silver shekel portraying the battlements and walls of Sidon’s harbor, with a ship lying at anchor and two prancing lions in the foreground. A typical Tyrian shekel showed the god Baal robed and wearing a tiara. He was riding a hippocamp (winged horse with the tail of a fish) on the sea, with a fish or dolphin beneath. The reverse showed an Egyptian-type owl facing right, plus a shepherd’s crook and flail, both royal insignia in Egypt. The stater (or tetradrachma) found by the disciple Peter in a fish’s mouth and used to pay the temple tax for himself and Jesus may have been a Tyrian coin (Mt 17:27; <span>rsv<\/span> “shekel”).<\/p>\n<p>The talent, which represented a certain weight of gold or silver, was a common medium of exchange before the development of coinage. During the Maccabean period, John Hyrcanus saved the city of Jerusalem from destruction in 133 <span>BC<\/span> by paying a ransom from a 900-year-old hoard stored in David’s sepulcher. Three thousand talents of silver were sent to the Seleucid king Antiochus VII Sidetes in return for his promise to withdraw his troops. Treasure plundered from the temple by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is recorded as amounting to 17 talents. In gold talents that sum would represent the equivalent of the purchase price of about 15 large houses in a modern Western city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CoinagefromtheMaccabeestoHerodAgrippaI\">Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>Even though a native Jewish dynasty assumed the government of the Holy Land, it was many years before any indigenous Jewish coinage was minted. Presumably the inhabitants continued to use the coinage of Tyre and Egypt and of the Seleucid Empire for their commercial transactions. It was formerly supposed that silver shekels bearing images of the chalice and pomegranate cluster dated from the reign of Simon Maccabeus (142–134 <span>BC<\/span>); more recent archaeological discoveries prove that those coins date from the first Jewish revolt (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>When the time came to issue the first Jewish coins, the die makers faced several problems. No mint was available, and no local people were skilled in design or die sinking. Coins current in the Near East at that time, which showed a high degree of design and craftsmanship, each bore the portrait head of a ruler or a god. For the Jews to make such coins would have meant contravening the second commandment, “You shall not make for yourself a graven image” (Ex 20:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). Not until well into Roman times was a coin struck in Palestine bearing a portrait head of a Roman emperor.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest coinage of the Hasmonean dynasty (the regnal name of the Maccabees) was the small bronze lepton (plural, lepta) of John Hyrcanus I (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>), son of Simon Maccabeus. The obverse showed two cornucopias with a pomegranate between them. That image symbolized the fertility that God had granted to the land. The reverse contained an inscription within a wreath, “John the high priest and the community of the Jews.” Small bronze lepta from the reign of Alexander Janneus, son of Hyrcanus I, have been found in great numbers. They were evidently much in demand for transactions at the temple, where money changers converted the gentile currency of visiting worshipers into the more acceptable Jewish money. Undoubtedly Hasmonean lepta were the coins Jesus scattered over the pavement of the Court of the Gentiles when he overturned the tables of the money changers (Mt 21:12; Jn 2:15). The lepton, or “mite,” of bronze or copper, worth <span>1<\/span>\/<span>400<\/span> of a shekel, was mentioned by Jesus on another occasion. He praised a widow’s gift of two mites to the temple treasury with the comment that the rich “contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, her whole living” (Mk 12:44, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Herod I came to power in Judea under the patronage of Mark Antony and secured the allegiance of the pro-Hasmonean Jews by marrying Mariamne, granddaughter of Hyrcanus II, in 38 <span>BC<\/span>. Herod was empowered to strike his own bronze coins. Although he had a free hand to introduce innovations, Herod’s lepta followed tradition quite faithfully. The lepta carried an anchor with letters meaning “Of King Herod.” The reverse bore the double cornucopias with a pomegranate (or poppy) between them. Herod also minted a large bronze coin with what appears to be a Macedonian helmet on the obverse and a slender tripod on the reverse, along with an inscription of Herod’s name. Other designs he employed included wheat, eagles, and wreaths. He issued no silver coinage, relying instead on the available supplies of silver coins from Tyre, Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, and Rome.<\/p>\n<p>After Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, his son Herod Archelaus assumed control. Lepta from that period bore a hanging cluster of grapes with a Greek inscription, and on the reverse a two-plumed Macedonian helmet. Grapes were an allusion to Israel as the Lord’s vine (Is 5).<\/p>\n<p>When Herod Antipas began his rule, also in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, he had no authority in Judea or Samaria. That portion of the former Jewish kingdom was placed under the control of Roman governors, or procurators, appointed directly by the emperor himself. Most familiar of the Roman procurators of Judea was Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36). His bronze coinage showed some bold innovations; his designs included representations of instruments used in the Roman religion such as the augur’s wand (resembling a shepherd’s crook in shape) and a ladle used in connection with broth prepared at sacrifices. The reverse bore a wreath enclosing the regnal date of <span>AD<\/span> 30–31. The two lepta put into the temple treasury (Lk 21:2) could have been lepta issued by Pilate or his predecessor. More likely, however, they were the Hasmonean lepta of Hyrcanus or Janneus, which were free of any taint of pagan Roman influence.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44), grandson of Herod the Great, continued the family tradition of ingratiating himself with the Roman overlords. Many of Herod Agrippa’s lepta have been found, showing a conical tasseled umbrella (perhaps symbolizing his royal protection of the people of Palestine) plus a Greek inscription indicating his reign. The reverse showed a bound cluster of three wheat ears and bore the regnal year as the legend.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RomanCoinsinNewTestamentTimes\">Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman “as” came into circulation about 348 <span>BC<\/span> as a bronze coin bearing the figure of an animal. The coin was named after the Roman one-pound weight, equivalent to 12 ounces (340 grams) in our modern system. At the time of Christ’s birth, the Roman “as” minted for use in the Asiatic provinces bore the head of the emperor Augustus, with a laurel wreath on the reverse. A smaller bronze quadrans, or quarter “as,” was also minted by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Another bronze coin found in Greek and Roman currency was the assarion, first minted in the first century <span>BC<\/span> but still in use in the Christian period. One type was stamped with a winged sphinx, with an amphora on the reverse. It is still debated whether the coin described as a “farthing” in the <span>kjv<\/span> was in fact a Greek assarion or a Roman “as” or quadrans. The coin is mentioned four times in the NT, most familiarly in the question “Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing?” (see Mt 5:26; 10:29; Mk 12:42; Lk 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> “penny”). There is no doubt that the <span>kjv<\/span> translators decided to make the coin seem more familiar to their readers by using the name of the smallest copper coin in circulation in England at that time.<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “penny” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is the Greek form of “denarius,” the normal daily wage for a laborer in NT times. In the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, for example, the master agreed to pay each man “a penny” for his day’s work (Mt 20:2, <span>kjv<\/span>; <span>rsv<\/span> “a denarius”). “Two pence” was the amount paid to the innkeeper by the good Samaritan (Lk 10:35, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because of the influence of the Roman denarius on British currency, the English penny has always been represented by the initial letter of its Roman equivalent.<\/p>\n<p>When the denarius, or “penny,” is recognized as a normal day’s wage, the astonishment of Jesus’ disciples when they were expected to find food for 5,000 people is better understood. They exclaimed that “two hundred pennyworth” of food would not feed such a crowd (Jn 6:7, <span>kjv<\/span>); that sum represented more than six months’ work.<\/p>\n<p>As might be expected, the silver and gold coinage current in Palestine during the time of Christ and for the remainder of the first century <span>AD<\/span> came primarily from Rome. The larger silver coins, however, that are referred to as tetradrachmas or staters in the NT came from Egypt, Phoenicia, or Antioch. The silver coin most frequently mentioned in the NT was the Roman denarius or the Greek drachma. Since few drachmas have been found in excavations dating from the first century, it is possible that the term was used in popular speech to refer to the denarius (plural, denarii), which was approximately the same size as the average Greek drachma. Actually, few Greek cities were permitted by their Roman overlords to continue minting drachmas.<\/p>\n<p>Caesar Augustus issued a decree for all the Roman world to be enrolled (Lk 2:1-2) in an empire-wide census just about the time that Jesus was born (6 or 5 <span>BC<\/span>). During his long reign (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14), Augustus authorized a large variety of denarii. They generally carried his likeness on their obverse with the inscription “Augustus, son of the divine one” (that is, son of Julius Caesar, who had been voted divine honors by the Roman Senate).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew 22:19 Jesus asked those trying to trick him with a question to show him a coin used to pay the government tax. They handed him a denarius bearing the portrait and inscription of Caesar (Mt 22:21). That coin could have been a denarius of Augustus, who had died some 16 years before, or of Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37), who was then on the throne. The silver denarius of Tiberius read “Tiberius Caesar Augustus, son of the divine Augustus.” The reverse showed the high priestess of the vestal order, flaming torch in hand, seated on her throne facing right. The title “pontif(ex) maxim(us)” referred to Tiberius rather than to the priestess.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals; Money; Money Changer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COINS Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century BC. Preview • Earliest Coins in Palestine • Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I • Roman Coins in New Testament Times Earliest Coins in Palestine Not until the...","summary_en":"COINS Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century BC. Preview • Earliest Coins in Palestine • Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I • Roman Coins in New Testament Times Earliest Coins in Palestine Not until the...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7279,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandments, the Ten","title_en":"Commandments, the Ten","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8046,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","title_en":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","content_ro":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<p>• Punishment<\/p>\n<p>• Conclusion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NearEasternContext\">Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>In ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\n<p>Conclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewCriminalLaw\">Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\n<p>Since Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Any type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\n<p>Murder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Kidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>Injuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\n<p>Negligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\n<p>In ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\n<p>Adultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>In a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\n<p>Little emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\n<p>The Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\n<p>A number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\n<p>Some Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Sorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Punishment\">Punishment<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Many forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n<p>1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\n<p>Before a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\n<p>In offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\n<p>The Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\n<p>Citizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 <span>BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\n<p>The Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Capital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n<p>1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\n<p>Usually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 <span>BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 <span>BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\n<p>Three types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<p>• Punishment<\/p>\n<p>• Conclusion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NearEasternContext\">Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>In ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\n<p>Conclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewCriminalLaw\">Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\n<p>Since Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Any type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\n<p>Murder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Kidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>Injuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\n<p>Negligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\n<p>In ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\n<p>Adultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>In a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\n<p>Little emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\n<p>The Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\n<p>A number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\n<p>Some Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Sorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Punishment\">Punishment<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Many forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n<p>1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\n<p>Before a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\n<p>In offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\n<p>The Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\n<p>Citizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 <span>BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\n<p>The Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Capital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n<p>1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\n<p>Usually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 <span>BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 <span>BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\n<p>Three types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","summary_en":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14108,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Being and Attributes of God","title_en":"Being and Attributes of God","content_ro":"<h3>GOD, Being and Attributes of<\/h3>\n<p>Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Acts 14:16-17; 17:22-31). The fullest revelation of God’s attributes is seen in his work of redemption through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>How does Scripture express the characteristics of God? First, in the divine names by which God revealed himself (Gn 1:1; 2:4; 17:1; Ex 3:6, 14-15; 6:2-5). Some of God’s attributes are revealed implicitly in the biblical accounts of Creation, fall, Flood, Babel, and the exodus, and more fully in the various covenants God made with his people. To Israel, he identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Ex 3:15). To the pharaoh, he identified himself as the “God of Israel” or the “God of the Hebrews” (5:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>By the time the people of Israel had reached Mt Sinai, the revelation of God’s attributes in the biblical narrative had become more explicit: “The <span>Lord<\/span>, the <span>Lord<\/span>, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation” (Ex 34:6-7, <span>rsv<\/span>). This summary is repeated elsewhere with slight variations (Nm 14:18; Neh 9:17; Ps 103:8; Jer 32:18; Jon 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>• Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>• Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAttributesofGod\">The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>The historic Christian confessions refer to various characteristics of God without calling them attributes or classifying them. The Westminster Shorter Catechism (1647) shows a tendency toward classification, describing God as “a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.” The first four attributes qualify the others.<\/p>\n<p>Several ways of classifying the attributes have been suggested. Generally such schemes divide the divine attributes into pairs: negative and positive, natural and moral, absolute and relative, immanent and eminent, intransitive and transitive, quiescent and operative, antithetical and synthetical, or incommunicable and communicable. Roman Catholics prefer the distinction of negative and positive, or natural and moral. Lutherans generally favor the distinction between quiescent and operative attributes. Reformed and evangelical scholars usually distinguish incommunicable and communicable attributes. Karl Barth grouped the attributes under freedom and love, and then proposed pairs of attributes that reflect freedom-love or love-freedom. In spite of the diversity of labels given the groups of attributes, surprising agreement exists in the attributes listed under each group.<\/p>\n<p>This article will make a distinction between incommunicable and communicable attributes without considering the classification itself as significant. No classification of God’s attributes is fully satisfactory. The <em>incommunicable<\/em> attributes emphasize the absolute distinctness of God, his transcendent greatness and exalted nature. Such attributes have little or no analogy in God’s creatures. The <em>communicable<\/em> attributes find some reflection or analogy in human beings created in God’s image. They indicate the immanence of God in relation to creatures. Yet all the attributes are God’s attributes; the distinction between God and man, between Creator and creature, is always basic.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IncommunicableAttributes\">Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Acknowledging some diversity of theological opinion, the following attributes will be considered incommunicable: unity, spirituality, independence, immutability, eternity, and immensity. In addition, the incomprehensibility of God must be mentioned.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>incomprehensibility<\/em> is sometimes included in lists of his attributes. It seems preferable to regard it as a description of human inability to understand God fully. Incomprehensibility is therefore not an attribute, although it is a given in every discussion of God. Through his revelation God is truly known by faith, yet no creature will ever comprehend God the Creator. Likewise, no one will ever fully understand any one of God’s attributes. Acknowledgment of God’s incomprehensibility should contribute to a spirit of humility in every consideration of God and his attributes (Pss 139:6; 145:3; Is 40:28; 55:8-9; Mt 11:25-27; Rom 11:33-36; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 13:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>unity<\/em> is an expression of monotheism—the fact that the God of Scripture is the only, living, true God (Dt 6:4; Mk 12:29; Jn 17:3). All other gods are idols and figments of human imagination. This attribute is reflected in the first commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me” (Ex 20:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>spirituality<\/em> indicates that God is not physical and is invisible. Positively it means that God is personal, living, self-conscious, and self-determining. The invisible God cannot be seen by human eyes (Ex 33:20), so the second commandment forbids every visible representation of God (20:4). Because God is Spirit, he must be worshiped in spirit and in truth (Jn 4:24).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>independence<\/em> or self-existence indicates that he is not dependent upon anything outside himself. He is self-sufficient in his existence, in his decrees, and in all his works. God has “life in himself” (Jn 5:26) and “he himself gives life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:25). To Israel, he revealed himself as the “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Ex 3:14), and he made Israel a covenant people for his own possession. God continues to work out his will in the world, and even though he uses various means, his independence remains intact. Thus, he enters into fellowship with his covenant people, and he publishes the gospel through human agents.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immutability<\/em> or constancy expresses his changelessness and his faithfulness to himself, to his decrees, promises, and works. He remains forever the same true God who undergoes no change from within or from anything outside himself. And so in James 1:17 we read: “Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change” (<span>rsv<\/span>). God’s oath to Abraham expressed his immutability so that his covenant people could be sure of the “unchangeable character of his purpose” (Heb 6:17). Samuel told King Saul that the Lord would not “change his mind; for he is not a man” (1 Sm 15:29, <span>niv<\/span>; cf. Nm 23:19). “For I the <span>Lord<\/span> do not change” (Mal 3:6). That was God’s explanation for not destroying sinful Judah; he shows mercy and keeps his covenant. Because “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever,” Christians are warned not to be “led by diverse and strange teachings” (Heb 13:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>God’s immutability or constancy does not imply that he is static or immobile. He is a dynamic, living God who is constantly working (Jn 5:17). Sometimes God is described as being sorry, repenting, or changing his mind (Gn 6:6-7; 1 Sm 15:11; Jon 3:10). In their contexts, such figurative expressions show the constancy of a God who, in holiness and righteousness, always abhors sin and reacts against it. In his grace and mercy, he forgives the penitent, and he carries out his promises without fail (Ps 110:4; Is 46:10; Jer 18:7-10; Eph 1:11). Thus, the constancy of God is significant in all human relationships with him, including petitions offered in prayer.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>eternity<\/em> indicates his transcendence over time. He is timeless and everlasting. He has no beginning or end; he does not undergo growth, development, or maturation. He existed before the creation of the world; he dwells now in eternity; he will continue as the eternal God even when history ends. Scripture speaks of God as “eternal” (Dt 33:27), “the King” (1 Tm 1:17), “the beginning and the end” (Rv 22:13). He “inhabits eternity” (Is 57:15) and his “years have no end” (Ps 102:27; cf. 2 Pt 3:8). Although God is above time and is timeless, time is his creation and history is the arena of his work. “When the time had fully come God sent forth his Son” (Gal 4:4); Jesus Christ died on a Friday and rose on the third day.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immensity<\/em> and <em>omnipresence<\/em> express his transcendence over space. God fills heaven and earth (Jer 23:23-24). Heaven is his throne, and the earth his footstool, so he is not restricted to a temple building (Is 66:1; Acts 17:24). Yet God is immanent in this world and is actively at work in it to establish his kingdom. No one can hide from the omnipresent God (Ps 139:6-12). Jesus promised, “I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:20). Since Pentecost (Acts 2), the Holy Spirit is said actually to dwell within the bodies of believers (1 Cor 6:19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CommunicableAttributes\">Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Many attributes of God can be classified under this heading, although it is sometimes difficult to say which biblical references to God should be regarded as attributes. A rich diversity of terminology is found in Scripture, with many synonyms. For convenience, the communicable attributes are often classified as intellectual, moral, and volitional.<\/p>\n<h5>Intellectual Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>knowledge<\/em> indicates that in a unique way God knows himself and all things possible and actual. <em>Omniscience<\/em> means that “he knows everything” (1 Jn 3:20). “Even before a word is on my tongue, lo, O <span>Lord<\/span>, thou knowest it altogether” (Ps 139:4), including the secret thoughts of a person’s heart. God’s righteous judgment is rooted in the fact that he “knows the thoughts of man” (Ps 94:11). Acknowledging that God’s omniscience is incomprehensible, the psalmist finds it a source of comfort (139:1-5). All the “treasures of wisdom and knowledge” are hidden in Christ (Col 2:3); therefore, the Christian is told to bring every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Cor 10:5). Christian sanctification includes renewal in knowledge to become more like Christ (Col 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>wisdom<\/em> indicates that he uses his knowledge in the best possible manner to achieve his goals. God’s works are varied, but they are all done in wisdom (Ps 104:24). “The <span>Lord<\/span> by wisdom founded the earth” (Prv 3:19); his providence also displays his wisdom (Gn 50:20). Redemption through Jesus Christ reveals God’s wisdom (1 Cor 1:24) and awakens awe and praise (Rom 11:33-36). Human beings should seek wisdom (Prv 3:21)—wisdom rooted in the fear of God (Jb 28:28; Ps 111:10; Prv 9:10). Christians are said to be “wise in Christ” (1 Cor 4:10), and Christ charges them to act wisely (Mt 10:16), thus emulating the wisdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>veracity<\/em> expresses his truthfulness and faithfulness. He is the truth and he is faithful to himself, to his Word, and to his promises (2 Tm 2:13). “God is light and in him is no darkness at all” (1 Jn 1:5); therefore, his followers are to walk in the light (vv 6-7). Jesus is “the way, and the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6); hence, Christians are to walk in the truth and show faithfulness in their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Moral Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>The most comprehensive description of God’s moral character is his <em>goodness.<\/em> God deals bountifully and kindly with all his creatures. He is “good to all” (Ps 145:9). Jesus insisted that “no one is good but God alone” (Mk 10:18; Lk 18:19). The redeemed praise God for his goodness (1 Chr 16:34; 2 Chr 5:13; Pss 106:1; 107:1; 118:1; 136:1; Jer 33:11) and are called upon to emulate this divine characteristic (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:27-36).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>love<\/em> is the heartbeat of the gospel. Perfect love flows among the Persons of the Trinity (Jn 3:35; 17:24). At Sinai God revealed himself as abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness (Ex 34:6-7), and all his covenantal relations with Abraham’s descendants showed his steadfast love. The chief manifestation of God’s love was the sending of his Son, Jesus Christ (Jn 3:16). The apostle John, who declared that “God is love,” pointed to the cross to indicate what that love really meant: “he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins” (1 Jn 4:8, 10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s love shown to undeserving sinners is called <em>grace<\/em> (Eph 1:6-8; 2:7-9; Ti 3:4). <em>Mercy<\/em> is God’s love (sometimes his goodness) shown to those in misery and distress. God is <em>longsuffering<\/em> or patient in his love; he gives time for repentance.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>holiness<\/em> depicts the moral purity and excellence of God. The description of Jesus’ holiness is applicable to each of the Persons of the Trinity: “holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners, exalted above the heavens” (Heb 7:26). The root idea of holiness is to be separate or set apart. Because of his inherent holiness, God is distinct from everything impure or unholy. God alone is holy; his name is holy, and he bears the name the “Holy One” (Pss 78:41; 89:18; 99:3, 9; 111:9; Is 12:6; Jer 51:5; Rv 15:4). Angels praise God’s holiness (Is 6:3; Rv 4:8). Objects, places, and people are called holy when set apart for the worship of God. Because God is holy, his people are called to holiness (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2; 1 Pt 1:14-15). God’s discipline of his people is aimed at making them share his holiness (Heb 12:10). The holiness of God is so prominent in Scripture that some have (mistakenly) regarded it as God’s chief attribute.<\/p>\n<h5>Volitional Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereignty<\/em> indicates the divine authority with which he rules the entire creation and in his sovereign good pleasure does whatever he wills. God is King over the entire creation, and he rules the destiny of human beings and nations. He restores his kingdom through Jesus Christ; the risen Lord revealed that all authority in heaven and on earth was given to him (Mt 28:18). Election to salvation in Christ is “according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph 1:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s sovereign will, though free, is not arbitrary; it is righteous and holy. He created the world and gave his law as the rule for his people’s lives; he covenants, blesses, and judges. God is the “King of kings and Lord of lords” (1 Tm 6:15); he calls all his subjects to obedient love (Dt 6:4-5; Mt 22:37-40; 1 Jn 5:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereign power<\/em> means that he is without bounds or limit in ability; he is <em>omnipotent<\/em> or almighty (Rv 4:8). By his powerful word, he created all things, and upholds “the universe by his word of power” (Heb 1:3). There is nothing too hard for the Lord God Almighty (Gn 18:14; Jer 32:27; Mt 19:26); he keeps his gracious covenant and fulfills all his promises (Lk 1:37; 2 Tm 2:13; Heb 6:18). The gospel is “the power of God for salvation” (Rom 1:16), for Christ is “the power of God” to save (1 Cor 1:24). Hence, believers must come to know “the immeasurable greatness of his power in us who believe, according to the working of his great might which he accomplished in Christ when he raised him from the dead and made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Glory<\/h5>\n<p>All the attributes of God are summarized in Scripture’s references to the <em>glory<\/em> of God. The majesty, splendor, beauty, and brilliance of God who dwells in unapproachable light are expressed by this indefinable term. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham (Acts 7:2); God showed his glory to Moses (Ex 33:18-19; 34:6-7). The God of the Lord Jesus Christ is the Father of glory (Eph 1:17). The heavens declare the glory of God (Ps 19:1); the majesty and glory of God fill heaven and earth (8:1). When finally every tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord, it will be for the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:11). Human beings were created for God’s glory, and Christian believers are instructed to do everything for the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31), thus reflecting in themselves his inherent glory.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOD, Being and Attributes of<\/h3>\n<p>Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Acts 14:16-17; 17:22-31). The fullest revelation of God’s attributes is seen in his work of redemption through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>How does Scripture express the characteristics of God? First, in the divine names by which God revealed himself (Gn 1:1; 2:4; 17:1; Ex 3:6, 14-15; 6:2-5). Some of God’s attributes are revealed implicitly in the biblical accounts of Creation, fall, Flood, Babel, and the exodus, and more fully in the various covenants God made with his people. To Israel, he identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Ex 3:15). To the pharaoh, he identified himself as the “God of Israel” or the “God of the Hebrews” (5:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>By the time the people of Israel had reached Mt Sinai, the revelation of God’s attributes in the biblical narrative had become more explicit: “The <span>Lord<\/span>, the <span>Lord<\/span>, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation” (Ex 34:6-7, <span>rsv<\/span>). This summary is repeated elsewhere with slight variations (Nm 14:18; Neh 9:17; Ps 103:8; Jer 32:18; Jon 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>• Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>• Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAttributesofGod\">The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>The historic Christian confessions refer to various characteristics of God without calling them attributes or classifying them. The Westminster Shorter Catechism (1647) shows a tendency toward classification, describing God as “a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.” The first four attributes qualify the others.<\/p>\n<p>Several ways of classifying the attributes have been suggested. Generally such schemes divide the divine attributes into pairs: negative and positive, natural and moral, absolute and relative, immanent and eminent, intransitive and transitive, quiescent and operative, antithetical and synthetical, or incommunicable and communicable. Roman Catholics prefer the distinction of negative and positive, or natural and moral. Lutherans generally favor the distinction between quiescent and operative attributes. Reformed and evangelical scholars usually distinguish incommunicable and communicable attributes. Karl Barth grouped the attributes under freedom and love, and then proposed pairs of attributes that reflect freedom-love or love-freedom. In spite of the diversity of labels given the groups of attributes, surprising agreement exists in the attributes listed under each group.<\/p>\n<p>This article will make a distinction between incommunicable and communicable attributes without considering the classification itself as significant. No classification of God’s attributes is fully satisfactory. The <em>incommunicable<\/em> attributes emphasize the absolute distinctness of God, his transcendent greatness and exalted nature. Such attributes have little or no analogy in God’s creatures. The <em>communicable<\/em> attributes find some reflection or analogy in human beings created in God’s image. They indicate the immanence of God in relation to creatures. Yet all the attributes are God’s attributes; the distinction between God and man, between Creator and creature, is always basic.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IncommunicableAttributes\">Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Acknowledging some diversity of theological opinion, the following attributes will be considered incommunicable: unity, spirituality, independence, immutability, eternity, and immensity. In addition, the incomprehensibility of God must be mentioned.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>incomprehensibility<\/em> is sometimes included in lists of his attributes. It seems preferable to regard it as a description of human inability to understand God fully. Incomprehensibility is therefore not an attribute, although it is a given in every discussion of God. Through his revelation God is truly known by faith, yet no creature will ever comprehend God the Creator. Likewise, no one will ever fully understand any one of God’s attributes. Acknowledgment of God’s incomprehensibility should contribute to a spirit of humility in every consideration of God and his attributes (Pss 139:6; 145:3; Is 40:28; 55:8-9; Mt 11:25-27; Rom 11:33-36; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 13:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>unity<\/em> is an expression of monotheism—the fact that the God of Scripture is the only, living, true God (Dt 6:4; Mk 12:29; Jn 17:3). All other gods are idols and figments of human imagination. This attribute is reflected in the first commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me” (Ex 20:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>spirituality<\/em> indicates that God is not physical and is invisible. Positively it means that God is personal, living, self-conscious, and self-determining. The invisible God cannot be seen by human eyes (Ex 33:20), so the second commandment forbids every visible representation of God (20:4). Because God is Spirit, he must be worshiped in spirit and in truth (Jn 4:24).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>independence<\/em> or self-existence indicates that he is not dependent upon anything outside himself. He is self-sufficient in his existence, in his decrees, and in all his works. God has “life in himself” (Jn 5:26) and “he himself gives life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:25). To Israel, he revealed himself as the “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Ex 3:14), and he made Israel a covenant people for his own possession. God continues to work out his will in the world, and even though he uses various means, his independence remains intact. Thus, he enters into fellowship with his covenant people, and he publishes the gospel through human agents.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immutability<\/em> or constancy expresses his changelessness and his faithfulness to himself, to his decrees, promises, and works. He remains forever the same true God who undergoes no change from within or from anything outside himself. And so in James 1:17 we read: “Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change” (<span>rsv<\/span>). God’s oath to Abraham expressed his immutability so that his covenant people could be sure of the “unchangeable character of his purpose” (Heb 6:17). Samuel told King Saul that the Lord would not “change his mind; for he is not a man” (1 Sm 15:29, <span>niv<\/span>; cf. Nm 23:19). “For I the <span>Lord<\/span> do not change” (Mal 3:6). That was God’s explanation for not destroying sinful Judah; he shows mercy and keeps his covenant. Because “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever,” Christians are warned not to be “led by diverse and strange teachings” (Heb 13:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>God’s immutability or constancy does not imply that he is static or immobile. He is a dynamic, living God who is constantly working (Jn 5:17). Sometimes God is described as being sorry, repenting, or changing his mind (Gn 6:6-7; 1 Sm 15:11; Jon 3:10). In their contexts, such figurative expressions show the constancy of a God who, in holiness and righteousness, always abhors sin and reacts against it. In his grace and mercy, he forgives the penitent, and he carries out his promises without fail (Ps 110:4; Is 46:10; Jer 18:7-10; Eph 1:11). Thus, the constancy of God is significant in all human relationships with him, including petitions offered in prayer.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>eternity<\/em> indicates his transcendence over time. He is timeless and everlasting. He has no beginning or end; he does not undergo growth, development, or maturation. He existed before the creation of the world; he dwells now in eternity; he will continue as the eternal God even when history ends. Scripture speaks of God as “eternal” (Dt 33:27), “the King” (1 Tm 1:17), “the beginning and the end” (Rv 22:13). He “inhabits eternity” (Is 57:15) and his “years have no end” (Ps 102:27; cf. 2 Pt 3:8). Although God is above time and is timeless, time is his creation and history is the arena of his work. “When the time had fully come God sent forth his Son” (Gal 4:4); Jesus Christ died on a Friday and rose on the third day.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immensity<\/em> and <em>omnipresence<\/em> express his transcendence over space. God fills heaven and earth (Jer 23:23-24). Heaven is his throne, and the earth his footstool, so he is not restricted to a temple building (Is 66:1; Acts 17:24). Yet God is immanent in this world and is actively at work in it to establish his kingdom. No one can hide from the omnipresent God (Ps 139:6-12). Jesus promised, “I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:20). Since Pentecost (Acts 2), the Holy Spirit is said actually to dwell within the bodies of believers (1 Cor 6:19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CommunicableAttributes\">Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Many attributes of God can be classified under this heading, although it is sometimes difficult to say which biblical references to God should be regarded as attributes. A rich diversity of terminology is found in Scripture, with many synonyms. For convenience, the communicable attributes are often classified as intellectual, moral, and volitional.<\/p>\n<h5>Intellectual Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>knowledge<\/em> indicates that in a unique way God knows himself and all things possible and actual. <em>Omniscience<\/em> means that “he knows everything” (1 Jn 3:20). “Even before a word is on my tongue, lo, O <span>Lord<\/span>, thou knowest it altogether” (Ps 139:4), including the secret thoughts of a person’s heart. God’s righteous judgment is rooted in the fact that he “knows the thoughts of man” (Ps 94:11). Acknowledging that God’s omniscience is incomprehensible, the psalmist finds it a source of comfort (139:1-5). All the “treasures of wisdom and knowledge” are hidden in Christ (Col 2:3); therefore, the Christian is told to bring every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Cor 10:5). Christian sanctification includes renewal in knowledge to become more like Christ (Col 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>wisdom<\/em> indicates that he uses his knowledge in the best possible manner to achieve his goals. God’s works are varied, but they are all done in wisdom (Ps 104:24). “The <span>Lord<\/span> by wisdom founded the earth” (Prv 3:19); his providence also displays his wisdom (Gn 50:20). Redemption through Jesus Christ reveals God’s wisdom (1 Cor 1:24) and awakens awe and praise (Rom 11:33-36). Human beings should seek wisdom (Prv 3:21)—wisdom rooted in the fear of God (Jb 28:28; Ps 111:10; Prv 9:10). Christians are said to be “wise in Christ” (1 Cor 4:10), and Christ charges them to act wisely (Mt 10:16), thus emulating the wisdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>veracity<\/em> expresses his truthfulness and faithfulness. He is the truth and he is faithful to himself, to his Word, and to his promises (2 Tm 2:13). “God is light and in him is no darkness at all” (1 Jn 1:5); therefore, his followers are to walk in the light (vv 6-7). Jesus is “the way, and the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6); hence, Christians are to walk in the truth and show faithfulness in their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Moral Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>The most comprehensive description of God’s moral character is his <em>goodness.<\/em> God deals bountifully and kindly with all his creatures. He is “good to all” (Ps 145:9). Jesus insisted that “no one is good but God alone” (Mk 10:18; Lk 18:19). The redeemed praise God for his goodness (1 Chr 16:34; 2 Chr 5:13; Pss 106:1; 107:1; 118:1; 136:1; Jer 33:11) and are called upon to emulate this divine characteristic (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:27-36).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>love<\/em> is the heartbeat of the gospel. Perfect love flows among the Persons of the Trinity (Jn 3:35; 17:24). At Sinai God revealed himself as abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness (Ex 34:6-7), and all his covenantal relations with Abraham’s descendants showed his steadfast love. The chief manifestation of God’s love was the sending of his Son, Jesus Christ (Jn 3:16). The apostle John, who declared that “God is love,” pointed to the cross to indicate what that love really meant: “he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins” (1 Jn 4:8, 10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s love shown to undeserving sinners is called <em>grace<\/em> (Eph 1:6-8; 2:7-9; Ti 3:4). <em>Mercy<\/em> is God’s love (sometimes his goodness) shown to those in misery and distress. God is <em>longsuffering<\/em> or patient in his love; he gives time for repentance.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>holiness<\/em> depicts the moral purity and excellence of God. The description of Jesus’ holiness is applicable to each of the Persons of the Trinity: “holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners, exalted above the heavens” (Heb 7:26). The root idea of holiness is to be separate or set apart. Because of his inherent holiness, God is distinct from everything impure or unholy. God alone is holy; his name is holy, and he bears the name the “Holy One” (Pss 78:41; 89:18; 99:3, 9; 111:9; Is 12:6; Jer 51:5; Rv 15:4). Angels praise God’s holiness (Is 6:3; Rv 4:8). Objects, places, and people are called holy when set apart for the worship of God. Because God is holy, his people are called to holiness (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2; 1 Pt 1:14-15). God’s discipline of his people is aimed at making them share his holiness (Heb 12:10). The holiness of God is so prominent in Scripture that some have (mistakenly) regarded it as God’s chief attribute.<\/p>\n<h5>Volitional Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereignty<\/em> indicates the divine authority with which he rules the entire creation and in his sovereign good pleasure does whatever he wills. God is King over the entire creation, and he rules the destiny of human beings and nations. He restores his kingdom through Jesus Christ; the risen Lord revealed that all authority in heaven and on earth was given to him (Mt 28:18). Election to salvation in Christ is “according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph 1:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s sovereign will, though free, is not arbitrary; it is righteous and holy. He created the world and gave his law as the rule for his people’s lives; he covenants, blesses, and judges. God is the “King of kings and Lord of lords” (1 Tm 6:15); he calls all his subjects to obedient love (Dt 6:4-5; Mt 22:37-40; 1 Jn 5:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereign power<\/em> means that he is without bounds or limit in ability; he is <em>omnipotent<\/em> or almighty (Rv 4:8). By his powerful word, he created all things, and upholds “the universe by his word of power” (Heb 1:3). There is nothing too hard for the Lord God Almighty (Gn 18:14; Jer 32:27; Mt 19:26); he keeps his gracious covenant and fulfills all his promises (Lk 1:37; 2 Tm 2:13; Heb 6:18). The gospel is “the power of God for salvation” (Rom 1:16), for Christ is “the power of God” to save (1 Cor 1:24). Hence, believers must come to know “the immeasurable greatness of his power in us who believe, according to the working of his great might which he accomplished in Christ when he raised him from the dead and made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Glory<\/h5>\n<p>All the attributes of God are summarized in Scripture’s references to the <em>glory<\/em> of God. The majesty, splendor, beauty, and brilliance of God who dwells in unapproachable light are expressed by this indefinable term. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham (Acts 7:2); God showed his glory to Moses (Ex 33:18-19; 34:6-7). The God of the Lord Jesus Christ is the Father of glory (Eph 1:17). The heavens declare the glory of God (Ps 19:1); the majesty and glory of God fill heaven and earth (8:1). When finally every tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord, it will be for the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:11). Human beings were created for God’s glory, and Christian believers are instructed to do everything for the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31), thus reflecting in themselves his inherent glory.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOD, Being and Attributes of Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption. According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Ac...","summary_en":"GOD, Being and Attributes of Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption. According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Ac...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14420,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gods and Goddesses","title_en":"Gods and Goddesses","content_ro":"<h3>GODS AND GODDESSES<\/h3>\n<p>Male and female deities worshiped by pagans. Although the Bible teaches that there is only one God (Is 45:18, 21-22; Mk 12:32), heathen people in ancient times quickly developed a belief in large numbers of so-called gods (Jer 10:11) and goddesses. Eventually each nation created and worshiped its own deities, usually more than one. Many of these “foreign gods” (1 Sm 7:3) are named in the Bible, and in most cases we are told to what nation each belonged. The list from Mesopotamia, a center of idol worship, is the longest: Adrammelech and Anammelech (2 Kgs 17:31), Bel (also known as Marduk, Is 46:1; Jer 50:2; 51:44), Kaiwan (Am 5:26), Nebo or Nabu (Is 46:1), Nergal (2 Kgs 17:30), Nisroch (19:37; Is 37:38), Rephan (Acts 7:43), Sakkuth (Am 5:26), Succoth-benoth (2 Kgs 17:30), Tammuz (Ez 8:14), and Tartak (2 Kgs 17:31). The Syrians were devoted to Ashima (v 30) and Rimmon (5:18), who was also worshiped under the compound name Hadad-rimmon (Zec 12:11). Israel’s eastern neighbors, Ammon and Moab, worshiped Milcom or Molech (1 Kgs 11:5-7, 33; 2 Kgs 23:13) and Chemosh, respectively, although the Moabites also worshiped a local manifestation of Baal (Nm 25:3-5). The Philistine gods were Dagon and Baal-zebub (2 Kgs 1:2-3, 6, 16), who is the equivalent of the NT Beelzebul (Mt 12:24; Lk 11:15). One Canaanite god, Baal, and two Canaanite goddesses, Asherah and Ashtoreth, are mentioned frequently in the OT; Ashtoreth was the same as the Mesopotamian Ishtar, also known as the “Queen of Heaven” (Jer 7:18; 44:17-19, 25). The gods of Egypt are represented by only two names in the Bible: Amon (Jer 46:25) and Apis (v 15). Nibhaz (2 Kgs 17:31) was probably an Elamite god.<\/p>\n<p>At least three Greco-Roman deities are mentioned in the NT: the Greek goddess Artemis (Acts 19:24-28, 34-35), known as Diana by the Romans, and the Greek gods Zeus and Hermes (Acts 14:12-13), known as Jupiter and Mercury, respectively, by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible clearly teaches that the gods of the nations have no objective reality (Jer 2:11), even though their worshipers sincerely believe that they actually exist (v 28). But the Lord proclaims that “they are no gods,” (Jer 2:11; 16:20) or “gods that are not gods” (5:7, <span>niv<\/span>). The NT further declares of idols that “an idol has no real existence” (1 Cor 8:4) and that “gods made with hands are not gods” (Acts 19:26). It is not surprising, then, that when the Israelites began to encounter other nations in significant ways—that is, as early as the time of the exodus—they were told repeatedly that the Lord is greater than all other gods (Ex 15:11; 18:11; Dt 10:17; 1 Chr 16:25; 2 Chr 2:5; Pss 86:8; 95:3; 96:4-5; 97:7-9; 135:5, 136:2; Dn 2:47; Zep 2:11).<\/p>\n<p>Such so-called gods were not worthy of Israel’s attention or veneration. Since there is only one God, other gods could not claim and did not deserve Israel’s worship (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7). The Hebrew language did not even have a word for “goddess” and therefore had to use its word for “god” to express that concept (see 1 Kgs 11:5, 33). The Israelites were to make no images (Ex 20:4, 23; Lv 19:4; Dt 5:8) or mention (Ex 23:13; Jos 23:7) of the gods and goddesses of their heathen neighbors.<\/p>\n<p>Yet despite all God’s warnings, idolatry was Israel’s besetting sin from the earliest times. During the patriarchal period, God’s people were attracted to the “household idols” (Gn 31:32) of their relatives, and they continued to worship other gods throughout most of their history (Ex 32:1-4, 8, 23, 31; 34:15; Hos 11:2). Idolatry eventually led to the destruction of the northern kingdom (2 Kgs 17:7-18) in 722 <span>BC<\/span> and of the southern kingdom (2 Kgs 22:17; cf. Dt 29:25-28) in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. During their time of exile in Babylonia, the Jewish people saw idolatry at its worst and turned away from it, but their ancestors could have avoided untold agony if they had simply followed the example of Joshua: “As for me and my house, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (Jos 24:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Idols, Idolatry; High Place.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GODS AND GODDESSES<\/h3>\n<p>Male and female deities worshiped by pagans. Although the Bible teaches that there is only one God (Is 45:18, 21-22; Mk 12:32), heathen people in ancient times quickly developed a belief in large numbers of so-called gods (Jer 10:11) and goddesses. Eventually each nation created and worshiped its own deities, usually more than one. Many of these “foreign gods” (1 Sm 7:3) are named in the Bible, and in most cases we are told to what nation each belonged. The list from Mesopotamia, a center of idol worship, is the longest: Adrammelech and Anammelech (2 Kgs 17:31), Bel (also known as Marduk, Is 46:1; Jer 50:2; 51:44), Kaiwan (Am 5:26), Nebo or Nabu (Is 46:1), Nergal (2 Kgs 17:30), Nisroch (19:37; Is 37:38), Rephan (Acts 7:43), Sakkuth (Am 5:26), Succoth-benoth (2 Kgs 17:30), Tammuz (Ez 8:14), and Tartak (2 Kgs 17:31). The Syrians were devoted to Ashima (v 30) and Rimmon (5:18), who was also worshiped under the compound name Hadad-rimmon (Zec 12:11). Israel’s eastern neighbors, Ammon and Moab, worshiped Milcom or Molech (1 Kgs 11:5-7, 33; 2 Kgs 23:13) and Chemosh, respectively, although the Moabites also worshiped a local manifestation of Baal (Nm 25:3-5). The Philistine gods were Dagon and Baal-zebub (2 Kgs 1:2-3, 6, 16), who is the equivalent of the NT Beelzebul (Mt 12:24; Lk 11:15). One Canaanite god, Baal, and two Canaanite goddesses, Asherah and Ashtoreth, are mentioned frequently in the OT; Ashtoreth was the same as the Mesopotamian Ishtar, also known as the “Queen of Heaven” (Jer 7:18; 44:17-19, 25). The gods of Egypt are represented by only two names in the Bible: Amon (Jer 46:25) and Apis (v 15). Nibhaz (2 Kgs 17:31) was probably an Elamite god.<\/p>\n<p>At least three Greco-Roman deities are mentioned in the NT: the Greek goddess Artemis (Acts 19:24-28, 34-35), known as Diana by the Romans, and the Greek gods Zeus and Hermes (Acts 14:12-13), known as Jupiter and Mercury, respectively, by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible clearly teaches that the gods of the nations have no objective reality (Jer 2:11), even though their worshipers sincerely believe that they actually exist (v 28). But the Lord proclaims that “they are no gods,” (Jer 2:11; 16:20) or “gods that are not gods” (5:7, <span>niv<\/span>). The NT further declares of idols that “an idol has no real existence” (1 Cor 8:4) and that “gods made with hands are not gods” (Acts 19:26). It is not surprising, then, that when the Israelites began to encounter other nations in significant ways—that is, as early as the time of the exodus—they were told repeatedly that the Lord is greater than all other gods (Ex 15:11; 18:11; Dt 10:17; 1 Chr 16:25; 2 Chr 2:5; Pss 86:8; 95:3; 96:4-5; 97:7-9; 135:5, 136:2; Dn 2:47; Zep 2:11).<\/p>\n<p>Such so-called gods were not worthy of Israel’s attention or veneration. Since there is only one God, other gods could not claim and did not deserve Israel’s worship (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7). The Hebrew language did not even have a word for “goddess” and therefore had to use its word for “god” to express that concept (see 1 Kgs 11:5, 33). The Israelites were to make no images (Ex 20:4, 23; Lv 19:4; Dt 5:8) or mention (Ex 23:13; Jos 23:7) of the gods and goddesses of their heathen neighbors.<\/p>\n<p>Yet despite all God’s warnings, idolatry was Israel’s besetting sin from the earliest times. During the patriarchal period, God’s people were attracted to the “household idols” (Gn 31:32) of their relatives, and they continued to worship other gods throughout most of their history (Ex 32:1-4, 8, 23, 31; 34:15; Hos 11:2). Idolatry eventually led to the destruction of the northern kingdom (2 Kgs 17:7-18) in 722 <span>BC<\/span> and of the southern kingdom (2 Kgs 22:17; cf. Dt 29:25-28) in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. During their time of exile in Babylonia, the Jewish people saw idolatry at its worst and turned away from it, but their ancestors could have avoided untold agony if they had simply followed the example of Joshua: “As for me and my house, we will serve the <span>Lord<\/span>” (Jos 24:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Idols, Idolatry; High Place.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GODS AND GODDESSES Male and female deities worshiped by pagans. Although the Bible teaches that there is only one God (Is 45:18, 21-22; Mk 12:32), heathen people in ancient times quickly developed a belief in large numbers of so-called gods (Jer 10:11) and goddesses. Eventually each nation created and worshiped its own deities, usually more than one. Many of these “foreign gods” (1 Sm 7:3) are named in the Bible, and in most cases we are told to what nation each belonged. The list from Mesopo...","summary_en":"GODS AND GODDESSES Male and female deities worshiped by pagans. Although the Bible teaches that there is only one God (Is 45:18, 21-22; Mk 12:32), heathen people in ancient times quickly developed a belief in large numbers of so-called gods (Jer 10:11) and goddesses. Eventually each nation created and worshiped its own deities, usually more than one. Many of these “foreign gods” (1 Sm 7:3) are named in the Bible, and in most cases we are told to what nation each belonged. The list from Mesopo...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15795,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Heaven","title_en":"Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on foundations and pillars (2 Sm 22:8) and spread out above the earth, with rain descending through its doors (Ps 78:23). The keynote of the OT revelation about the physical heavens is set forth in Psalms 8 and 19:1-6. Elsewhere the OT speaks of the atmospheric heavens as the region of the clouds (Ps 147:8), winds (Zec 2:6), rain (Dt 11:11), thunder (1 Sm 2:10), dew (Dt 33:13), frost (Jb 38:29), and the abode of birds (Gn 1:26, 30). It is also the locale of such destructive forces as hail (Jos 10:11), fire, and brimstone (Gn 19:24). In the NT this notion of the vaulted expanse of the sky as the region in which the elements, clouds, and tempests gather (Mt 16:2; Lk 4:25) and birds fly (Lk 9:58) is continued.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the atmospheric regions, the Hebrew idea of the physical heavens includes stellar space, which ultimately embraces the universe. The heavenly bodies of the stellar heavens were viewed by the Hebrews as inexpressibly glorious manifestations of God’s handiwork without having any power or vitality of their own. These include the sun, moon, planets, and stars, which were but lights in the firmament of the heavens (Gn 1:14; 15:5). As such, they were regarded as unworthy of worship because God had, by his own will and grace, made humans superior to them. In fact, the Hebrews were expressly forbidden to worship the stellar bodies (Ex 20:4), the gods and goddesses who represented them (Jer 44:17-25), or to participate in astrological speculation (Is 47:13). Hence, this unique theological ordinance differentiated the Hebrews, who viewed the heavenly bodies as made and moved by the will of God, from the superstitious heathen, who worshiped them.<\/p>\n<p>The term “heaven of heavens” (Dt 10:14; see also <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Kgs 8:27; Pss 68:33; 148:4) is the literal English rendition of the Hebrew idiom for the superlative “the highest heaven.” Some have thought this the counterpart to Paul’s expression “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2), which parallels the classical Greek conception of three heavens. This notion was subsequently adopted by the Roman Catholic medieval church and in the Latin form of <em>Coelum Aqueum, Coelum Sidereum,<\/em> and <em>Coelum Empyreum.<\/em> The basic concept followed the Greek view, and it coincides with the OT view of the physical and spiritual heavens as indicated earlier. Those who follow this approach tend to regard this third heaven as the place reached by the souls of the blessed as they pass through the two lower regions of the atmosphere and outer space containing the celestial bodies, and enter into the uttermost reaches of the universe.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Lord Jesus indicated that heaven is the dwelling place of God (Mt 6:9). Jesus, during his earthly ministry, repeatedly claimed that he had come from heaven (Jn 3:13; 6:33-51); and on at least three occasions utterances from heaven confirmed these claims (Mt 3:16-17; 17:5; Jn 12:28). There is where the true tabernacle stands, of which the earthly tabernacle was merely a shadow (cf. Heb 8:1-5). That abode of God was in view when the apostle Paul wrote of “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2). As such, it is often seen as a synonym for God himself (cf. Mt 23:22; Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>After Jesus’ ascension, recorded in Acts 1:6-11, two angels reminded the disciples that Jesus would return again from heaven. This was later confirmed by the apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:1-11; Eph 4:7-16; 1 Tm 3:16) and reiterated in the summary of the teachings of the NT known as the Apostles’ Creed. In all, the relationship of Jesus Christ to the heavenly abode of God is inextricably interwoven in the NT and is inseparable from the gospel message itself. Indeed, it is from the “right hand of God” that Christ forever lives to make intercession for those who have come to him by faith (Heb 7:25; cf. Mk 14:62).<\/p>\n<p>Paul asserts that the believer’s body will be made conformable to the glorious body of Jesus Christ when Christ returns from heaven (Phil 3:20-21). The believers need such a heavenly body to match their heavenly citizenship. The term “citizenship” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “commonwealth” (<span>rsv<\/span>) implies a colony of individuals who live in a foreign country while observing the laws of their homeland instead of the land in which they reside (cf. Acts 22:28). The implication for believers is quite clear: They are to live according to the moral and ethical principles of God as revealed from heaven regardless of the standards proclaimed by the world. They have been raised together with Christ and have been instructed to “seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God” (Col 3:1). From there Christ has blessed his followers “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3). The expression “in the heavenly places” is peculiar to Ephesians (see 1:3, 20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12), suggesting that the blessings of the spiritual world are not relegated to some remote future time or place but can be perceived by faith here and now. That is why believers are said to have been made partakers already in the heavenly calling (Heb 3:1; 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the meanwhile, believers look forward to a new heaven and a new earth with the new Jerusalem. There will be no tears, sorrow, pain, death, and night there because the Son of God will be there (Rv 21:1-4, 27; 22:1-5), and in the resurrected state there will be no marrying or giving in marriage (Lk 20:27-38). At least two OT saints, Enoch (Gn 5:22-24; Heb 11:5) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11), were translated directly into the presence of God—into heaven. In addition to Paul’s statement about the third heaven, John was called into heaven (Rv 4:1), a heaven that is intended to be populated (cf. 19:1). All believers will ultimately dwell in heaven in their resurrection bodies, which they will receive when the Lord comes for them from heaven (1 Thes 4:16-17; Rv 19:1-4). The Lord will also give treasures and rewards at that time (Mt 5:12; 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Cor 5:1; 2 Tm 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1 Pt 1:4; 5:4; Rv 2:10; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; New Heavens and New Earth; Paradise.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on foundations and pillars (2 Sm 22:8) and spread out above the earth, with rain descending through its doors (Ps 78:23). The keynote of the OT revelation about the physical heavens is set forth in Psalms 8 and 19:1-6. Elsewhere the OT speaks of the atmospheric heavens as the region of the clouds (Ps 147:8), winds (Zec 2:6), rain (Dt 11:11), thunder (1 Sm 2:10), dew (Dt 33:13), frost (Jb 38:29), and the abode of birds (Gn 1:26, 30). It is also the locale of such destructive forces as hail (Jos 10:11), fire, and brimstone (Gn 19:24). In the NT this notion of the vaulted expanse of the sky as the region in which the elements, clouds, and tempests gather (Mt 16:2; Lk 4:25) and birds fly (Lk 9:58) is continued.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the atmospheric regions, the Hebrew idea of the physical heavens includes stellar space, which ultimately embraces the universe. The heavenly bodies of the stellar heavens were viewed by the Hebrews as inexpressibly glorious manifestations of God’s handiwork without having any power or vitality of their own. These include the sun, moon, planets, and stars, which were but lights in the firmament of the heavens (Gn 1:14; 15:5). As such, they were regarded as unworthy of worship because God had, by his own will and grace, made humans superior to them. In fact, the Hebrews were expressly forbidden to worship the stellar bodies (Ex 20:4), the gods and goddesses who represented them (Jer 44:17-25), or to participate in astrological speculation (Is 47:13). Hence, this unique theological ordinance differentiated the Hebrews, who viewed the heavenly bodies as made and moved by the will of God, from the superstitious heathen, who worshiped them.<\/p>\n<p>The term “heaven of heavens” (Dt 10:14; see also <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Kgs 8:27; Pss 68:33; 148:4) is the literal English rendition of the Hebrew idiom for the superlative “the highest heaven.” Some have thought this the counterpart to Paul’s expression “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2), which parallels the classical Greek conception of three heavens. This notion was subsequently adopted by the Roman Catholic medieval church and in the Latin form of <em>Coelum Aqueum, Coelum Sidereum,<\/em> and <em>Coelum Empyreum.<\/em> The basic concept followed the Greek view, and it coincides with the OT view of the physical and spiritual heavens as indicated earlier. Those who follow this approach tend to regard this third heaven as the place reached by the souls of the blessed as they pass through the two lower regions of the atmosphere and outer space containing the celestial bodies, and enter into the uttermost reaches of the universe.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Lord Jesus indicated that heaven is the dwelling place of God (Mt 6:9). Jesus, during his earthly ministry, repeatedly claimed that he had come from heaven (Jn 3:13; 6:33-51); and on at least three occasions utterances from heaven confirmed these claims (Mt 3:16-17; 17:5; Jn 12:28). There is where the true tabernacle stands, of which the earthly tabernacle was merely a shadow (cf. Heb 8:1-5). That abode of God was in view when the apostle Paul wrote of “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2). As such, it is often seen as a synonym for God himself (cf. Mt 23:22; Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>After Jesus’ ascension, recorded in Acts 1:6-11, two angels reminded the disciples that Jesus would return again from heaven. This was later confirmed by the apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:1-11; Eph 4:7-16; 1 Tm 3:16) and reiterated in the summary of the teachings of the NT known as the Apostles’ Creed. In all, the relationship of Jesus Christ to the heavenly abode of God is inextricably interwoven in the NT and is inseparable from the gospel message itself. Indeed, it is from the “right hand of God” that Christ forever lives to make intercession for those who have come to him by faith (Heb 7:25; cf. Mk 14:62).<\/p>\n<p>Paul asserts that the believer’s body will be made conformable to the glorious body of Jesus Christ when Christ returns from heaven (Phil 3:20-21). The believers need such a heavenly body to match their heavenly citizenship. The term “citizenship” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “commonwealth” (<span>rsv<\/span>) implies a colony of individuals who live in a foreign country while observing the laws of their homeland instead of the land in which they reside (cf. Acts 22:28). The implication for believers is quite clear: They are to live according to the moral and ethical principles of God as revealed from heaven regardless of the standards proclaimed by the world. They have been raised together with Christ and have been instructed to “seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God” (Col 3:1). From there Christ has blessed his followers “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3). The expression “in the heavenly places” is peculiar to Ephesians (see 1:3, 20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12), suggesting that the blessings of the spiritual world are not relegated to some remote future time or place but can be perceived by faith here and now. That is why believers are said to have been made partakers already in the heavenly calling (Heb 3:1; 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the meanwhile, believers look forward to a new heaven and a new earth with the new Jerusalem. There will be no tears, sorrow, pain, death, and night there because the Son of God will be there (Rv 21:1-4, 27; 22:1-5), and in the resurrected state there will be no marrying or giving in marriage (Lk 20:27-38). At least two OT saints, Enoch (Gn 5:22-24; Heb 11:5) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11), were translated directly into the presence of God—into heaven. In addition to Paul’s statement about the third heaven, John was called into heaven (Rv 4:1), a heaven that is intended to be populated (cf. 19:1). All believers will ultimately dwell in heaven in their resurrection bodies, which they will receive when the Lord comes for them from heaven (1 Thes 4:16-17; Rv 19:1-4). The Lord will also give treasures and rewards at that time (Mt 5:12; 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Cor 5:1; 2 Tm 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1 Pt 1:4; 5:4; Rv 2:10; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; New Heavens and New Earth; Paradise.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEAVEN Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven. In the Old Testament The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on found...","summary_en":"HEAVEN Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven. In the Old Testament The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on found...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17126,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Idolatry Idols","title_en":"Idolatry Idols","content_ro":"<h3>IDOLS, IDOLATRY<\/h3>\n<p>Man-made images or natural representations worshiped as deities; anything receiving worship other than the one true God. Idolatry is the spiritual worship of an idol. Many idolaters literally serve idols: in ancient Egypt statues of gods were regularly and ritually clothed and fed. Some concept of the worship of a false god, Baal, is given in the account of the contest on Mt Carmel: the priests of Baal cried aloud, they “limped” (<span>rsv<\/span>) around the altar, they cut themselves with swords and lances (1 Kgs 18:26-29). Baal worship was widely followed by Israel during the period of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Abraham’s ancestors were worshipers of idols in Mesopotamia (Jos 24:2). Archaeological excavations in that area have revealed the images of numerous deities, and Mesopotamian religious literature reveals the gross polytheism out of which Abraham came. The tendency of the Israelites toward idolatry was in part the expression of the universal human longing for a god one can see and know through the physical senses.<\/p>\n<p>Most of the idolatry of the Israelites was borrowed from their neighbors. During the more than 400 years that the descendants of Jacob spent in Egypt, they were exposed to polytheistic idolatry, which influenced their religious mind-set. At Sinai, while Moses was receiving the Ten Commandments from the Lord, the people were demanding that Aaron make gods for them (Ex 32:1-6). He fashioned a golden calf, following an Egyptian form, for the whole bovine family was worshiped in Egypt—the Apis bull, the Hathor cow, and the Mnevis calf.<\/p>\n<p>It was after his stay in Egypt (1 Kgs 11:40) that Jeroboam became king of Israel and set up golden calves, one at Bethel and one at Dan (12:26-33), an action that earned him the label as being the one who made Israel sin (2 Kgs 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>Already in patriarchal times there are references to the teraphim, or household gods. Examples of these idols have been found at Ur of the Chaldees, Nuzi, and other sites, and are referred to in the cuneiform tablets. The teraphim that Rachel stole from Laban could be hidden in her camel’s saddlebag (Gn 31:34). It seems, however, that in the time of David such idols were larger, for when Saul’s men came to kill David, Michal, David’s wife and the daughter of Saul, helped David to escape and then took such an image and placed it in a bed to make the men think that David was sick (1 Sm 19:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>The prohibition of idolatry is explicitly stated in the second commandment (Ex 20:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>): “Do not make idols of any kind, whether in the shape of birds or animals or fish. You must never worship or bow down to them, for I, the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, am a jealous God who will not share your affection with any other god!” (cf. Ex 34:17; Lv 19:4; 26:1; Dt 4:15-19; 27:1-5). This commandment is an extension or auxiliary of the first, for it seeks to preserve God’s uniqueness and to protect his glory. The definition of idolatry was broadened during the time of Samuel, who confronted King Saul with the charge that stubbornness is the same as idolatry (1 Sm 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Previous to the conquest of Canaan, the Lord kept warning Israel against marrying members of the native populace, which he had ordered Israel to annihilate. This measure was intended to prevent the weakening of moral life in Israel (Ex 34:16; Dt 7:3-4). This principle is again expanded in the NT (cf. 1 Cor 15:33; 2 Cor 6:14). The history of Israel demonstrated the practicality of the prohibition against such marriages, for they inevitably led to apostasy. Perhaps the saddest example is Solomon (1 Kgs 11:1-8). When Solomon was old, his wives turned his heart to other gods, so that he was not wholly true to the Lord his God (v 4).<\/p>\n<p>In the time of the judges there was an infamous case of idol worship (Jgs 17:1–18:31). The mother of an Ephraimite named Micah took 200 pieces of silver and had a silversmith make them into a graven image for her son. He also had a shrine, an ephod, and teraphim. He hired a wandering Levite to be his priest, but men from the tribe of Dan came along and took the Levite, the image, and all the accoutrements and set up this idol at Dan and used it as an object of their worship (18:30-31).<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture the kings of Israel are evaluated on the basis of what they did with respect to the “high places” and idols. Asa removed all the idols his ancestors had made (1 Kgs 15:12) and would not let Maacah be queen mother because she had an abominable image made for Asherah. He cut down and burned the image (v 13). The Israelite king Ahab, however, was an idolater (1 Kgs 21:26; cf. 16:30-33).<\/p>\n<p>Hezekiah destroyed the high places, broke down the pillars, and cut down the Asherim (2 Kgs 18:4; 2 Chr 31:1). He also put an end to a strange cult that illustrates the insidious nature of idolatry. The bronze serpent that Moses lifted up on a pole to save the Israelites from death by snakebite (Nm 21:9; cf. Jn 3:14) had been preserved until the time of Hezekiah. It had been given the name Nehushtan, and people venerated it and burned incense to it. Hezekiah destroyed it (2 Kgs 18:4) because what had been an instrument for good had become a thing of evil.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Isaiah described the making of an idol in human form (Is 40:19-20; 44:9-17). Images were cast in a mold using molten metal (40:19; 44:10). Statues were forged by smiths (44:12), carved from wood (44:13-17), and overlaid with precious metal (40:19). Small clay images and plaques were also molded and fired in a kiln, and statues were sculptured from stone. The psalmist spoke out against idols and images (Pss 96:5; 97:7; 106:34-39) and the helplessness of idols is described in Psalms 115:4-8 and 135:15-18.<\/p>\n<p>The northern and southern kingdoms of Israel went into captivity because they forsook God and served idols. The Jews were well aware that idolatry had brought them into captivity, and during their time in Babylon, they developed an abhorrence to idols that has characterized Judaism to this very day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The fullest discussion in the NT on idolatry <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidololatreia<\/span><em>)<\/em> and the idolworshiper <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidololatres<\/span><em>)<\/em> is found in Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians. In an earlier (no longer extant) epistle, Paul had told the Corinthians not to associate with those who called themselves believers but were still idol worshipers (1 Cor 5:9-11). After that letter the Corinthians must have asked Paul for clarification on this matter. Thus, in this epistle Paul provides a response to their question; the “idol worshiper” is mentioned in 5:10-11, 6:9, 10:7, and “idolatry” is spoken of in 10:14.<\/p>\n<p>The terms, “idolatry” and “idol worshiper,” are related to two other expressions: (1) “idol” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidolon<\/span><em>),<\/em> found in 1 Corinthians 8:4; 10:19; 12:2; and (2) “food sacrificed to idols” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidolothutos<\/span><em>),<\/em> found in 1 Corinthians 8:1, 4, 7; 10:19. The kind of idolatry that Paul condemns is that which involved Christians offering sacrifices to idols and then partaking of the food that had been sacrificed to them. The participants are called idol worshipers because their involvement in idolatrous sacrifices was perceived as having fellowship with demons. Paul strictly prohibited the eating of sacrificial food at the popular temples in the presence of idol-demons. As such, he shared the same view about idols as most Jews in his day. For the Jews, idols and heathen deities were identical. (See 1 Thes 1:9, where Paul contrasts “idols” with “the living and <em>true<\/em> God.”) To Paul, idols in and of themselves were nothing (1 Cor 8:4); behind the idol, however, was a demon (10:20).<\/p>\n<p>The eating of sacrificial food at the cultic meals in pagan temples was censured by Paul because it was understood that the participants thereby became united to demons (see 1 Cor 10:19-21). However, Paul had no problem with those who purchased food that had been left over from these events and that was later sold in the marketplace. In his judgment, if they ate it at home, they were not participating in idolatry. They could eat this food with a good conscience—unless, of course, in doing so they would be the means of destroying a weaker believer. For the sake of such believers, one should abstain. This was a matter of conscience (10:25-29). But going to pagan festivities and eating meals offered to idols was not permitted in any form.<\/p>\n<p>The Corinthians had participated in these meals regularly before they became Christians and apparently had continued to do so after their conversion. In Corinth such meals were the regular practice both at national festivals and private celebrations. The “gods” (whom Paul considered “demons”) were thought to be present at these events because the sacrifices were made to them. Thus, to participate in these events was to join oneself to demons and thereby become an idol worshiper. The ancient Israelites had been carried away into idolatry by their pagan neighbors on several occasions when they were enticed to participate in these pagan celebrations (e.g., Nm 25; cf. Ex 32:6). The festivities involved all sorts of licentiousness. In 1 Corinthians 10, Paul referred to this apostasy of the Israelites and used it as a negative example. Because the Israelites became involved in pagan festivities, they were carried away into idolatry and fornication, which incited God’s wrath and brought destruction.<\/p>\n<p>In other Pauline Epistles, idolatry is mentioned but not with the kind of definition and extended discussion that is found in 1 Corinthians. Nonetheless, Paul speaks out against actual idolatry and what we might call figurative idolatry (i.e., idolatry in the sense of desiring something above God).<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 1:18-32 sexual licentiousness and other sins are ultimately traced to idolatry. The Gentiles, who should have known that God existed, as evidenced in creation and conscience, abandoned the immortal, invisible God in exchange for mortal, visible images (i.e., idols). Because of this abandonment, God gave them over to do the filthy things their hearts desired (Rom 1:24). Thus, idolatry is included in Paul’s list of what he calls “the works of the flesh” (see Gal 5:19-20). And those who are idol worshipers are included in the catalog of all those evil people who will not inherit the kingdom of God (see 1 Cor 6:9).<\/p>\n<p>In Ephesians 5:5 Paul again includes idolaters among those who will not inherit the kingdom of God. However, such idolaters are not just those who go to pagan temples and worship idols; they are those who are greedy or covetous. According to superior manuscript evidence, the verse reads, “No fornicator or impure person or greedy person, which is the same as an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.” The point seems to be that the greedy, covetous person who makes his desires his god is much the same as an idolater. Thus, covetousness and idolatry are made synonymous. The parallel passage, Colossians 3:5, makes this explicit, which literally says covetousness is idolatry.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Gods and Goddesses; Grove; High Place.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>IDOLS, IDOLATRY<\/h3>\n<p>Man-made images or natural representations worshiped as deities; anything receiving worship other than the one true God. Idolatry is the spiritual worship of an idol. Many idolaters literally serve idols: in ancient Egypt statues of gods were regularly and ritually clothed and fed. Some concept of the worship of a false god, Baal, is given in the account of the contest on Mt Carmel: the priests of Baal cried aloud, they “limped” (<span>rsv<\/span>) around the altar, they cut themselves with swords and lances (1 Kgs 18:26-29). Baal worship was widely followed by Israel during the period of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Abraham’s ancestors were worshipers of idols in Mesopotamia (Jos 24:2). Archaeological excavations in that area have revealed the images of numerous deities, and Mesopotamian religious literature reveals the gross polytheism out of which Abraham came. The tendency of the Israelites toward idolatry was in part the expression of the universal human longing for a god one can see and know through the physical senses.<\/p>\n<p>Most of the idolatry of the Israelites was borrowed from their neighbors. During the more than 400 years that the descendants of Jacob spent in Egypt, they were exposed to polytheistic idolatry, which influenced their religious mind-set. At Sinai, while Moses was receiving the Ten Commandments from the Lord, the people were demanding that Aaron make gods for them (Ex 32:1-6). He fashioned a golden calf, following an Egyptian form, for the whole bovine family was worshiped in Egypt—the Apis bull, the Hathor cow, and the Mnevis calf.<\/p>\n<p>It was after his stay in Egypt (1 Kgs 11:40) that Jeroboam became king of Israel and set up golden calves, one at Bethel and one at Dan (12:26-33), an action that earned him the label as being the one who made Israel sin (2 Kgs 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>Already in patriarchal times there are references to the teraphim, or household gods. Examples of these idols have been found at Ur of the Chaldees, Nuzi, and other sites, and are referred to in the cuneiform tablets. The teraphim that Rachel stole from Laban could be hidden in her camel’s saddlebag (Gn 31:34). It seems, however, that in the time of David such idols were larger, for when Saul’s men came to kill David, Michal, David’s wife and the daughter of Saul, helped David to escape and then took such an image and placed it in a bed to make the men think that David was sick (1 Sm 19:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>The prohibition of idolatry is explicitly stated in the second commandment (Ex 20:4-5, <span>nlt<\/span>): “Do not make idols of any kind, whether in the shape of birds or animals or fish. You must never worship or bow down to them, for I, the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, am a jealous God who will not share your affection with any other god!” (cf. Ex 34:17; Lv 19:4; 26:1; Dt 4:15-19; 27:1-5). This commandment is an extension or auxiliary of the first, for it seeks to preserve God’s uniqueness and to protect his glory. The definition of idolatry was broadened during the time of Samuel, who confronted King Saul with the charge that stubbornness is the same as idolatry (1 Sm 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Previous to the conquest of Canaan, the Lord kept warning Israel against marrying members of the native populace, which he had ordered Israel to annihilate. This measure was intended to prevent the weakening of moral life in Israel (Ex 34:16; Dt 7:3-4). This principle is again expanded in the NT (cf. 1 Cor 15:33; 2 Cor 6:14). The history of Israel demonstrated the practicality of the prohibition against such marriages, for they inevitably led to apostasy. Perhaps the saddest example is Solomon (1 Kgs 11:1-8). When Solomon was old, his wives turned his heart to other gods, so that he was not wholly true to the Lord his God (v 4).<\/p>\n<p>In the time of the judges there was an infamous case of idol worship (Jgs 17:1–18:31). The mother of an Ephraimite named Micah took 200 pieces of silver and had a silversmith make them into a graven image for her son. He also had a shrine, an ephod, and teraphim. He hired a wandering Levite to be his priest, but men from the tribe of Dan came along and took the Levite, the image, and all the accoutrements and set up this idol at Dan and used it as an object of their worship (18:30-31).<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture the kings of Israel are evaluated on the basis of what they did with respect to the “high places” and idols. Asa removed all the idols his ancestors had made (1 Kgs 15:12) and would not let Maacah be queen mother because she had an abominable image made for Asherah. He cut down and burned the image (v 13). The Israelite king Ahab, however, was an idolater (1 Kgs 21:26; cf. 16:30-33).<\/p>\n<p>Hezekiah destroyed the high places, broke down the pillars, and cut down the Asherim (2 Kgs 18:4; 2 Chr 31:1). He also put an end to a strange cult that illustrates the insidious nature of idolatry. The bronze serpent that Moses lifted up on a pole to save the Israelites from death by snakebite (Nm 21:9; cf. Jn 3:14) had been preserved until the time of Hezekiah. It had been given the name Nehushtan, and people venerated it and burned incense to it. Hezekiah destroyed it (2 Kgs 18:4) because what had been an instrument for good had become a thing of evil.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Isaiah described the making of an idol in human form (Is 40:19-20; 44:9-17). Images were cast in a mold using molten metal (40:19; 44:10). Statues were forged by smiths (44:12), carved from wood (44:13-17), and overlaid with precious metal (40:19). Small clay images and plaques were also molded and fired in a kiln, and statues were sculptured from stone. The psalmist spoke out against idols and images (Pss 96:5; 97:7; 106:34-39) and the helplessness of idols is described in Psalms 115:4-8 and 135:15-18.<\/p>\n<p>The northern and southern kingdoms of Israel went into captivity because they forsook God and served idols. The Jews were well aware that idolatry had brought them into captivity, and during their time in Babylon, they developed an abhorrence to idols that has characterized Judaism to this very day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The fullest discussion in the NT on idolatry <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidololatreia<\/span><em>)<\/em> and the idolworshiper <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidololatres<\/span><em>)<\/em> is found in Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians. In an earlier (no longer extant) epistle, Paul had told the Corinthians not to associate with those who called themselves believers but were still idol worshipers (1 Cor 5:9-11). After that letter the Corinthians must have asked Paul for clarification on this matter. Thus, in this epistle Paul provides a response to their question; the “idol worshiper” is mentioned in 5:10-11, 6:9, 10:7, and “idolatry” is spoken of in 10:14.<\/p>\n<p>The terms, “idolatry” and “idol worshiper,” are related to two other expressions: (1) “idol” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidolon<\/span><em>),<\/em> found in 1 Corinthians 8:4; 10:19; 12:2; and (2) “food sacrificed to idols” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eidolothutos<\/span><em>),<\/em> found in 1 Corinthians 8:1, 4, 7; 10:19. The kind of idolatry that Paul condemns is that which involved Christians offering sacrifices to idols and then partaking of the food that had been sacrificed to them. The participants are called idol worshipers because their involvement in idolatrous sacrifices was perceived as having fellowship with demons. Paul strictly prohibited the eating of sacrificial food at the popular temples in the presence of idol-demons. As such, he shared the same view about idols as most Jews in his day. For the Jews, idols and heathen deities were identical. (See 1 Thes 1:9, where Paul contrasts “idols” with “the living and <em>true<\/em> God.”) To Paul, idols in and of themselves were nothing (1 Cor 8:4); behind the idol, however, was a demon (10:20).<\/p>\n<p>The eating of sacrificial food at the cultic meals in pagan temples was censured by Paul because it was understood that the participants thereby became united to demons (see 1 Cor 10:19-21). However, Paul had no problem with those who purchased food that had been left over from these events and that was later sold in the marketplace. In his judgment, if they ate it at home, they were not participating in idolatry. They could eat this food with a good conscience—unless, of course, in doing so they would be the means of destroying a weaker believer. For the sake of such believers, one should abstain. This was a matter of conscience (10:25-29). But going to pagan festivities and eating meals offered to idols was not permitted in any form.<\/p>\n<p>The Corinthians had participated in these meals regularly before they became Christians and apparently had continued to do so after their conversion. In Corinth such meals were the regular practice both at national festivals and private celebrations. The “gods” (whom Paul considered “demons”) were thought to be present at these events because the sacrifices were made to them. Thus, to participate in these events was to join oneself to demons and thereby become an idol worshiper. The ancient Israelites had been carried away into idolatry by their pagan neighbors on several occasions when they were enticed to participate in these pagan celebrations (e.g., Nm 25; cf. Ex 32:6). The festivities involved all sorts of licentiousness. In 1 Corinthians 10, Paul referred to this apostasy of the Israelites and used it as a negative example. Because the Israelites became involved in pagan festivities, they were carried away into idolatry and fornication, which incited God’s wrath and brought destruction.<\/p>\n<p>In other Pauline Epistles, idolatry is mentioned but not with the kind of definition and extended discussion that is found in 1 Corinthians. Nonetheless, Paul speaks out against actual idolatry and what we might call figurative idolatry (i.e., idolatry in the sense of desiring something above God).<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 1:18-32 sexual licentiousness and other sins are ultimately traced to idolatry. The Gentiles, who should have known that God existed, as evidenced in creation and conscience, abandoned the immortal, invisible God in exchange for mortal, visible images (i.e., idols). Because of this abandonment, God gave them over to do the filthy things their hearts desired (Rom 1:24). Thus, idolatry is included in Paul’s list of what he calls “the works of the flesh” (see Gal 5:19-20). And those who are idol worshipers are included in the catalog of all those evil people who will not inherit the kingdom of God (see 1 Cor 6:9).<\/p>\n<p>In Ephesians 5:5 Paul again includes idolaters among those who will not inherit the kingdom of God. However, such idolaters are not just those who go to pagan temples and worship idols; they are those who are greedy or covetous. According to superior manuscript evidence, the verse reads, “No fornicator or impure person or greedy person, which is the same as an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.” The point seems to be that the greedy, covetous person who makes his desires his god is much the same as an idolater. Thus, covetousness and idolatry are made synonymous. The parallel passage, Colossians 3:5, makes this explicit, which literally says covetousness is idolatry.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Gods and Goddesses; Grove; High Place.<\/p>","summary_ro":"IDOLS, IDOLATRY Man-made images or natural representations worshiped as deities; anything receiving worship other than the one true God. Idolatry is the spiritual worship of an idol. Many idolaters literally serve idols: in ancient Egypt statues of gods were regularly and ritually clothed and fed. Some concept of the worship of a false god, Baal, is given in the account of the contest on Mt Carmel: the priests of Baal cried aloud, they “limped” (rsv) around the altar, they cut themselves with...","summary_en":"IDOLS, IDOLATRY Man-made images or natural representations worshiped as deities; anything receiving worship other than the one true God. Idolatry is the spiritual worship of an idol. Many idolaters literally serve idols: in ancient Egypt statues of gods were regularly and ritually clothed and fed. Some concept of the worship of a false god, Baal, is given in the account of the contest on Mt Carmel: the priests of Baal cried aloud, they “limped” (rsv) around the altar, they cut themselves with...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43840,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:4","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:4<\/strong> Not making <em>an image<\/em> of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:4<\/strong> Not making <em>an image<\/em> of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:4 Not making an image of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).","summary_en":"20:4 Not making an image of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71466,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:4","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:4<\/strong> Not making <em>an image<\/em> of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:4<\/strong> Not making <em>an image<\/em> of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:4 Not making an image of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).","summary_en":"20:4 Not making an image of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99092,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:4","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:4<\/strong> Not making <em>an image<\/em> of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:4<\/strong> Not making <em>an image<\/em> of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:4 Not making an image of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).","summary_en":"20:4 Not making an image of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126718,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:4","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:4<\/strong> Not making <em>an image<\/em> of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:4<\/strong> Not making <em>an image<\/em> of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:4 Not making an image of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).","summary_en":"20:4 Not making an image of God is the first step toward recognizing that he is transcendent—that he is the Creator of the universe and distinct from it. To represent God as something in creation was inevitably to end up worshiping the creation rather than the Creator, and this immorality had deadly consequences (Rom 1:18-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64129,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91755,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119381,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147007,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Basic Laws","title_en":"Basic Laws","content_ro":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Basic Laws<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2-17; Deut 5:6-21): “Observe the Sabbath day. . . . Honor your father and mother.” These commands open the door to the expression of “faith, hope, and love” (see 1 Cor 13:13).<\/p>\n<p>The negative prohibitions set up a boundary between good and evil. Primary among these laws are the first two of the Ten Commandments: “You must not have any other god but me” (Exod 20:3), and “You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image . . . You must not bow down to them or worship them” (Exod 20:4-5). These prohibited behaviors violate the fundamental command to love the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the books of the prophets, these laws lie behind God’s evaluation of the Israelites’ conduct—as well as the conduct of any ruler, group of people, or individual in any time or place. Those who violate these core laws reject the one true God, resulting in decrees of divine judgment and disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:2-17; Lev 19:18; Deut 5:6-21; 6:5; Jer 2:7-13; 3:8-11; 5:1-9; 6:10-21; 7:16-29; 8:9-13; 11:6-14; 17:1-4; 22:1-9; 23:10-12; 34:8-20; Matt 19:19; 22:37; Mark 12:30-31; Luke 10:27; 1 Cor 13:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","summary_en":"Basic Laws Throughout Scripture, the one true God is the highest authority; his laws are set out both as positive commands and as negative prohibitions. The positive side can be summed up in two basic laws: “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength” (Deut 6:5; Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18; Matt 19:19; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27). These two basic laws are reflected in the positive laws in the T...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":529,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Adam (Person)","title_en":"Adam (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>ADAM (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the first humans were created male and female in God’s image with his specific mandate to populate and rule over the earth. With regard to the rest of creation the first humans were, on one hand, part of it, being created on the same day as other land animals; on the other hand, they were distinctly above it, being the culmination of the creation process and sole bearers of God’s image.<\/p>\n<p>The intent of the second account is much more specific (2:4–3:24); it seeks to explain the origin of the present human condition of sin and death and to set the stage for the drama of redemption. The story treats in detail aspects of Adam’s creation omitted from the first story. For example, it tells of the formation of Adam from the dust of the ground and of his receiving the breath of life from God (2:7). It recounts the planting of the Garden and the responsibility given to Adam to cultivate it (2:8-15). God’s instruction to Adam that the fruit of every tree in the Garden was his for food, except one, is carefully recorded, as well as the solemn warning that the fruit of the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” was never to be eaten, under the pain of death (2:16-17). Adam’s loneliness after naming the animals and not finding a suitable companion is also described, thus introducing the creation of the first woman (2:18-22). The creation of Eve from Adam’s rib poignantly portrays the essential unity of spirit and purpose of the sexes intended by God.<\/p>\n<p>The story does not end on such a positive note, however. It moves on to record the great deception Satan played upon Eve through the serpent. By clever insinuations and distortion of God’s original commandment (cf. 3:1 with 2:16-17), the serpent tricked Eve into eating the forbidden fruit and sharing it with Adam. Eve seems to have eaten because she was deceived (1 Tm 2:14), Adam out of a willful and conscious rebellion. Ironically, the two beings originally created in God’s image and likeness believed that they could become “like” God by disobeying him (Gn 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>The effects of their disobedience were immediate, though not at all what Adam had expected. For the first time a barrier of shame disrupted the unity of man and woman (3:7). More important, a barrier of real moral guilt was erected between the first couple and God. The story relates that when God came looking for Adam after his rebellion, he was hiding among the trees, already aware of his separation from God (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam threw the blame on Eve and, by implication, back on God: “It was the woman you gave me who brought me the fruit” (3:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eve in turn blamed the serpent (3:13).<\/p>\n<p>According to the story in Genesis, God held all three responsible and informed each one of the calamitous consequences of their rebellion (3:14-19). The two great mandates, originally signs of pure blessing, became mixed with curse and pain—the earth could now be populated only through the woman’s birth pangs and could be subdued only by the man’s labor and perspiration (3:16-18). Further, the unity of man and woman would be strained by man’s subjugation of her, or possibly by the beginning of a struggle for dominance between them (3:16b can be taken both ways). Finally, God pronounced the ultimate consequence: as he had originally warned, Adam and Eve were to die. Someday the breath of life would be taken from them, and their bodies would return to the dust from which they were made (3:19). That very day they also experienced a “spiritual” death; they were separated from God, the giver of life, and from the tree of life, the symbol of eternal life (3:22). God sent them out of Eden, and there was no way back. The entrance to paradise was blocked by the cherubim and flaming sword (3:23-24). Only God could restore what they had lost.<\/p>\n<p>The story is not devoid of hope. God was merciful even then. He made them garments of skin to cover their bodies and promised that someday the power of Satan behind the serpent would be crushed by the woman’s “seed” (Gn 3:15; cf. Rom 16:20). Many scholars consider that promise to be the first biblical mention of redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSignificanceofAdam\">The Significance of Adam<\/p>\n<p>Adam’s significance is based upon several assumptions, the first being that he was a historical individual. That assumption was made by many OT writers (Gn 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7). The NT writers agreed (Lk 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tm 2:13-14; Jude 1:14). Equally essential to Adam’s significance is a second assumption, that he was more than an individual. To begin with, the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> (more correctly <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’a–dha–m<\/span>) is not merely a proper name. Even in the Genesis story it is not used as a name until Genesis 4:25. The word is one of several Hebrew words meaning “man” and is the generic term for “human race.” In the vast majority of cases it refers either to a male individual (Lv 1:2; Jos 14:15; Neh 9:29; Is 56:2) or to humanity in general (Ex 4:11; Nm 12:3; 16:29; Dt 4:28; 1 Kgs 4:31; Jb 7:20; 14:1). The generic, collective sense of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> is also behind the phrase “children (or sons) of men” (2 Sm 7:14; Pss 11:4; 12:1; 14:2; 53:2; 90:3; Eccl 1:13; 2:3). That phrase, literally “sons of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span><em>,”<\/em> simply means “men” or “human beings,” and when it is used the entire human race is in view. Indeed, the universalistic human connotation of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> indicates a concern in the OT going far beyond Israel’s nationalistic hopes and its God—to all the earth’s people and the Lord of all nations (Gn 9:5-7; Dt 5:24; 8:3; 1 Kgs 8:38-39; Pss 8:4; 89:48; 107:8-31; Prv 12:14; Mi 6:8).<\/p>\n<p>It is no accident, then, that the first man was named “Adam” or “Man.” The name intimates that to speak about Adam is somehow also to speak about the entire human race. Such usage can perhaps best be understood through the ancient concept of corporate personality and representation familiar to the Hebrews and other Near Eastern peoples. Modern thinking emphasizes the individual; existence of the social group and all social relationships has been seen as secondary to, and dependent upon, the existence and desire of the individual. The Hebrew understanding was quite different. Though the separate personality of the individual was appreciated (Jer 31:29-30; Ez 18:4), there was a strong tendency to see the social group (family, tribe, nation) as a single organism with a corporate identity of its own. Likewise the group representative was seen as the embodiment or personification of the corporate personality of the group. Within the representative the essential qualities and characteristics of the social group resided in such a way that the actions and decisions of the representative were binding on the entire group. If the group was a family, the father was usually considered the corporate representative; for good or for ill his family, and sometimes his descendants, received the results of his actions (Gn 17:1-8; cf. Gn 20:1-9, 18; Ex 20:5-6; Jos 7:24-25; Rom 11:28; Heb 7:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>As the original man and father of humankind, in whose image all succeeding generations would be born (Gn 5:3), Adam was the corporate representative of humanity. The creation accounts themselves give the impression that the mandates of Genesis 1:26-30 (cf. Gn 9:1, 7; Pss 8:5-7; 104:14) as well as the curses of Genesis 3:16-19 (cf. Ps 90:3; Eccl 12:7; Is 13:8; 21:3) were meant not only for Adam (and Eve) but, through him, for the entire race.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 5:12-21 the apostle Paul contrasted the death and condemnation brought upon humanity by Adam’s disobedience with the life and justification given to humanity through Christ’s obedience. More explicitly, in 1 Corinthians 15:45-50 (<span>rsv<\/span>), Paul called Christ the “last Adam,” “second man,” and the “man of heaven” in juxtaposition to the “first Adam,” the “first man,” and the “man of dust.”<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, the human race was divided into two groups in the persons of Adam and Christ. Those who remain “incorporated” in Adam are the “old” humanity, bearing the image of the “man of dust” and partaking of his sin and alienation from God and Creation (Rom 5:12-19; 8:20-22). But those who are incorporated into Christ by faith become Christ’s “body” (Rom 12:4-5; 1 Cor 12:12-13, 27; Eph 1:22-23; Col 1:18); they are recreated in Christ’s image (Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 3:18); they become one “new man” (Eph 2:15; 4:24; Col 3:9-10, <span>kjv<\/span>); and they partake of the new creation (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The old barriers raised by Adam are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16). For Paul, the functional similarity of Adam and Christ as representatives meant that Christ had restored what Adam had lost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eve; Man, Old and New; New Creation, New Creature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ADAM (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the first humans were created male and female in God’s image with his specific mandate to populate and rule over the earth. With regard to the rest of creation the first humans were, on one hand, part of it, being created on the same day as other land animals; on the other hand, they were distinctly above it, being the culmination of the creation process and sole bearers of God’s image.<\/p>\n<p>The intent of the second account is much more specific (2:4–3:24); it seeks to explain the origin of the present human condition of sin and death and to set the stage for the drama of redemption. The story treats in detail aspects of Adam’s creation omitted from the first story. For example, it tells of the formation of Adam from the dust of the ground and of his receiving the breath of life from God (2:7). It recounts the planting of the Garden and the responsibility given to Adam to cultivate it (2:8-15). God’s instruction to Adam that the fruit of every tree in the Garden was his for food, except one, is carefully recorded, as well as the solemn warning that the fruit of the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” was never to be eaten, under the pain of death (2:16-17). Adam’s loneliness after naming the animals and not finding a suitable companion is also described, thus introducing the creation of the first woman (2:18-22). The creation of Eve from Adam’s rib poignantly portrays the essential unity of spirit and purpose of the sexes intended by God.<\/p>\n<p>The story does not end on such a positive note, however. It moves on to record the great deception Satan played upon Eve through the serpent. By clever insinuations and distortion of God’s original commandment (cf. 3:1 with 2:16-17), the serpent tricked Eve into eating the forbidden fruit and sharing it with Adam. Eve seems to have eaten because she was deceived (1 Tm 2:14), Adam out of a willful and conscious rebellion. Ironically, the two beings originally created in God’s image and likeness believed that they could become “like” God by disobeying him (Gn 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>The effects of their disobedience were immediate, though not at all what Adam had expected. For the first time a barrier of shame disrupted the unity of man and woman (3:7). More important, a barrier of real moral guilt was erected between the first couple and God. The story relates that when God came looking for Adam after his rebellion, he was hiding among the trees, already aware of his separation from God (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam threw the blame on Eve and, by implication, back on God: “It was the woman you gave me who brought me the fruit” (3:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). Eve in turn blamed the serpent (3:13).<\/p>\n<p>According to the story in Genesis, God held all three responsible and informed each one of the calamitous consequences of their rebellion (3:14-19). The two great mandates, originally signs of pure blessing, became mixed with curse and pain—the earth could now be populated only through the woman’s birth pangs and could be subdued only by the man’s labor and perspiration (3:16-18). Further, the unity of man and woman would be strained by man’s subjugation of her, or possibly by the beginning of a struggle for dominance between them (3:16b can be taken both ways). Finally, God pronounced the ultimate consequence: as he had originally warned, Adam and Eve were to die. Someday the breath of life would be taken from them, and their bodies would return to the dust from which they were made (3:19). That very day they also experienced a “spiritual” death; they were separated from God, the giver of life, and from the tree of life, the symbol of eternal life (3:22). God sent them out of Eden, and there was no way back. The entrance to paradise was blocked by the cherubim and flaming sword (3:23-24). Only God could restore what they had lost.<\/p>\n<p>The story is not devoid of hope. God was merciful even then. He made them garments of skin to cover their bodies and promised that someday the power of Satan behind the serpent would be crushed by the woman’s “seed” (Gn 3:15; cf. Rom 16:20). Many scholars consider that promise to be the first biblical mention of redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSignificanceofAdam\">The Significance of Adam<\/p>\n<p>Adam’s significance is based upon several assumptions, the first being that he was a historical individual. That assumption was made by many OT writers (Gn 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7). The NT writers agreed (Lk 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tm 2:13-14; Jude 1:14). Equally essential to Adam’s significance is a second assumption, that he was more than an individual. To begin with, the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> (more correctly <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’a–dha–m<\/span>) is not merely a proper name. Even in the Genesis story it is not used as a name until Genesis 4:25. The word is one of several Hebrew words meaning “man” and is the generic term for “human race.” In the vast majority of cases it refers either to a male individual (Lv 1:2; Jos 14:15; Neh 9:29; Is 56:2) or to humanity in general (Ex 4:11; Nm 12:3; 16:29; Dt 4:28; 1 Kgs 4:31; Jb 7:20; 14:1). The generic, collective sense of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> is also behind the phrase “children (or sons) of men” (2 Sm 7:14; Pss 11:4; 12:1; 14:2; 53:2; 90:3; Eccl 1:13; 2:3). That phrase, literally “sons of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span><em>,”<\/em> simply means “men” or “human beings,” and when it is used the entire human race is in view. Indeed, the universalistic human connotation of the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">adam<\/span> indicates a concern in the OT going far beyond Israel’s nationalistic hopes and its God—to all the earth’s people and the Lord of all nations (Gn 9:5-7; Dt 5:24; 8:3; 1 Kgs 8:38-39; Pss 8:4; 89:48; 107:8-31; Prv 12:14; Mi 6:8).<\/p>\n<p>It is no accident, then, that the first man was named “Adam” or “Man.” The name intimates that to speak about Adam is somehow also to speak about the entire human race. Such usage can perhaps best be understood through the ancient concept of corporate personality and representation familiar to the Hebrews and other Near Eastern peoples. Modern thinking emphasizes the individual; existence of the social group and all social relationships has been seen as secondary to, and dependent upon, the existence and desire of the individual. The Hebrew understanding was quite different. Though the separate personality of the individual was appreciated (Jer 31:29-30; Ez 18:4), there was a strong tendency to see the social group (family, tribe, nation) as a single organism with a corporate identity of its own. Likewise the group representative was seen as the embodiment or personification of the corporate personality of the group. Within the representative the essential qualities and characteristics of the social group resided in such a way that the actions and decisions of the representative were binding on the entire group. If the group was a family, the father was usually considered the corporate representative; for good or for ill his family, and sometimes his descendants, received the results of his actions (Gn 17:1-8; cf. Gn 20:1-9, 18; Ex 20:5-6; Jos 7:24-25; Rom 11:28; Heb 7:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>As the original man and father of humankind, in whose image all succeeding generations would be born (Gn 5:3), Adam was the corporate representative of humanity. The creation accounts themselves give the impression that the mandates of Genesis 1:26-30 (cf. Gn 9:1, 7; Pss 8:5-7; 104:14) as well as the curses of Genesis 3:16-19 (cf. Ps 90:3; Eccl 12:7; Is 13:8; 21:3) were meant not only for Adam (and Eve) but, through him, for the entire race.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 5:12-21 the apostle Paul contrasted the death and condemnation brought upon humanity by Adam’s disobedience with the life and justification given to humanity through Christ’s obedience. More explicitly, in 1 Corinthians 15:45-50 (<span>rsv<\/span>), Paul called Christ the “last Adam,” “second man,” and the “man of heaven” in juxtaposition to the “first Adam,” the “first man,” and the “man of dust.”<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, the human race was divided into two groups in the persons of Adam and Christ. Those who remain “incorporated” in Adam are the “old” humanity, bearing the image of the “man of dust” and partaking of his sin and alienation from God and Creation (Rom 5:12-19; 8:20-22). But those who are incorporated into Christ by faith become Christ’s “body” (Rom 12:4-5; 1 Cor 12:12-13, 27; Eph 1:22-23; Col 1:18); they are recreated in Christ’s image (Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 3:18); they become one “new man” (Eph 2:15; 4:24; Col 3:9-10, <span>kjv<\/span>); and they partake of the new creation (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The old barriers raised by Adam are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16). For Paul, the functional similarity of Adam and Christ as representatives meant that Christ had restored what Adam had lost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eve; Man, Old and New; New Creation, New Creature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ADAM (Person) First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ. The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the f...","summary_en":"ADAM (Person) First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ. The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the f...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9298,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Demon-Possession","title_en":"Demon-Possession","content_ro":"<h3>DEMON-POSSESSION<\/h3>\n<p>Demonic occupation of a human being. The term “possession” is misleading and is not the best translation for the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">daimonizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> which literally means to be “demonized” and can often best be translated as “to have a demon.” The noun form is “demoniac.”<\/p>\n<p>Demons can enter the body of a person (Lk 8:30; 22:3), in order to control the individual’s thoughts and actions. Sometimes a distinction is made between demonic oppression and demonic possession; this supposedly differentiates an attack from without and control from within. Although a non-Christian may be said to be “possessed” by a demon, the Christian cannot be so possessed, for he belongs to Christ and his human spirit has been sealed by the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13). Demonic spirits somehow know and acknowledge this seal.<\/p>\n<p>Demons can also enter the bodies of animals, as in the case of the swine in Mark 5:13. Demons are associated with books of magic (Acts 19:19), idols (1 Cor 10:19-21), and fetishes. Demons often cause illness or physical disability; Luke 13:11 tells of a woman who had “been crippled by an evil spirit” for 18 years but was delivered and healed by Jesus. Since evil spirits often attack the mind and the emotions, many symptoms of mental illness may be attributed to their activity. The boy whom Jesus delivered just after the Transfiguration exhibited symptoms of epilepsy. Paranoia may be the work of a spirit of fear. Some individuals suffering from schizophrenia (split or multiple personality) may in reality be demonized by a number of spirits. It is possible for a person to have many demons. Jesus cast seven of them out of Mary Magdalene (Lk 8:2). The spirit in the Gerasene demoniac gave his name as Legion, “for we are many” (Mk 5:9; Lk 8:30). In the time of Augustus a Roman legion consisted of 6,000 foot soldiers, usually accompanied by an equal number of auxiliary troops.<\/p>\n<p>Demonization occurs in various ways. Some people are demonized by a hereditary curse, which may continue to the third or fourth generation (Ex 20:5). The curse against illegitimacy was particularly strong, for the bastard could not enter the congregation of Israel until the tenth generation (Dt 23:2). Curses may also be placed upon someone by spells, incantations, or similar practices such as voodoo or other forms of witchcraft. Galatians 3:13 speaks of redemption from the curse of the law through Christ’s having “become a curse” for us. Usually believers are immune from curses made against them, unless they have given grounds to the devil (Eph 4:27). Such grounds may be provided through drugs, illicit sex, the occult, or any other avenue forbidden in the Bible. Involvement with tarot cards, horoscopes, or any other form of fortune-telling may give demons opportunity to enter. Such contacts may seem innocuous, but Satan utilizes the smallest foothold to gain advantage over people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Manifestation\">Manifestation<\/p>\n<p>Often demons prefer to hide rather than to make their presence known, for then they can exercise control without hindrance. When they do manifest themselves, often when challenged, all sorts of strange and frightening things may occur. They possess supernatural powers (cf. Rv 16:14), which they exhibit outright or through their victims. The Gerasene demoniac had superhuman physical strength, so that he could not be bound with fetters or chains (Mk 5:4-5); he lived in tombs and went about night and day screaming and injuring himself with stones.<\/p>\n<p>The spirit in the demonized boy in Mark 9 rendered him dumb and deaf, threw him on the ground, and caused him to roll about and to foam at the mouth (9:18-20). The demon caused him to grind his teeth and become rigid; he had tried to kill the boy by throwing him into the fire and into the water on various occasions (vv 18-22). Before leaving at the command of Jesus, the demon cried out (cf. Mk 1:26), convulsed the boy terribly, and left him lying like a corpse. Jesus took him by the hand and raised him up (9:27). Similar manifestations take place today.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Exorcism\">Exorcism<\/p>\n<p>Casting out demons, or exorcism, was a regular and frequent part of the ministry of Jesus, and he taught and commanded his followers to do the same. This command has never been abrogated, and the ministry of deliverance should be even more important today, when the forces of evil are so rampant. The following principles are derived from the practice of Jesus, the Scriptures, and personal observation and involvement.<\/p>\n<p>1. Jesus spoke to demons and commanded them to come out (Mk 1:25; 9:25). He cast them out “with a word” (Mt 8:16). Jesus gave his followers authority to use his name in casting them out and used this as a sign of the believer (Mk 16:17). His name is not a magical formula, and its use depends on the relationship between the Lord and the person using his name, as the sons of Sceva found out to their dismay (Acts 19:11-18).<\/p>\n<li>2. Jesus cast out demons by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power to heal all who were oppressed by the devil (Lk 4:18-19; Acts 10:38).<\/li>\n<li>3. The Lord gave clear teaching about “the binding of the strong man” in deliverance (Mt 12:29; Mk 3:27) and about binding and loosing (Mt 18:18).<\/li>\n<li>4. Prayer is an important weapon in spiritual warfare. When the disciples asked (Mk 9:28) why they could not cast out a demon, Jesus replied that this kind comes out only with prayer.<\/li>\n<li>5. Revelation 12:11 testifies to the power of “the blood of the Lamb” in overcoming Satan. Demons do not like to hear of the blood of Jesus and often become agitated at the mention of it.<\/li>\n<li>6. God has equipped the believer with armor for defense in spiritual battle (Eph 6:10-17).<\/li>\n<li>7. The Lord answered Satan with correctly applied texts from the Bible. We have been given the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God (Eph 6:17; Heb 4:12), as a means of defense and for attack against the enemy.<\/li>\n<li>8. We must come against the hosts of hell from our position in the heavenly places (Eph 2:6), not from our limited earthly station.<\/li>\n<li>9. We must recognize that the ultimate victory has already been won by Jesus, who came to destroy the works of the devil (1 Jn 3:8) and to destroy him who has the power of death (Heb 2:14-16). When Jesus cried out on the cross, “It is finished,” he meant that the redemptive work was done; when he arose from the dead, he demonstrated his power over death. We win only as we enter into his victory.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Demon.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEMON-POSSESSION<\/h3>\n<p>Demonic occupation of a human being. The term “possession” is misleading and is not the best translation for the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">daimonizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> which literally means to be “demonized” and can often best be translated as “to have a demon.” The noun form is “demoniac.”<\/p>\n<p>Demons can enter the body of a person (Lk 8:30; 22:3), in order to control the individual’s thoughts and actions. Sometimes a distinction is made between demonic oppression and demonic possession; this supposedly differentiates an attack from without and control from within. Although a non-Christian may be said to be “possessed” by a demon, the Christian cannot be so possessed, for he belongs to Christ and his human spirit has been sealed by the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13). Demonic spirits somehow know and acknowledge this seal.<\/p>\n<p>Demons can also enter the bodies of animals, as in the case of the swine in Mark 5:13. Demons are associated with books of magic (Acts 19:19), idols (1 Cor 10:19-21), and fetishes. Demons often cause illness or physical disability; Luke 13:11 tells of a woman who had “been crippled by an evil spirit” for 18 years but was delivered and healed by Jesus. Since evil spirits often attack the mind and the emotions, many symptoms of mental illness may be attributed to their activity. The boy whom Jesus delivered just after the Transfiguration exhibited symptoms of epilepsy. Paranoia may be the work of a spirit of fear. Some individuals suffering from schizophrenia (split or multiple personality) may in reality be demonized by a number of spirits. It is possible for a person to have many demons. Jesus cast seven of them out of Mary Magdalene (Lk 8:2). The spirit in the Gerasene demoniac gave his name as Legion, “for we are many” (Mk 5:9; Lk 8:30). In the time of Augustus a Roman legion consisted of 6,000 foot soldiers, usually accompanied by an equal number of auxiliary troops.<\/p>\n<p>Demonization occurs in various ways. Some people are demonized by a hereditary curse, which may continue to the third or fourth generation (Ex 20:5). The curse against illegitimacy was particularly strong, for the bastard could not enter the congregation of Israel until the tenth generation (Dt 23:2). Curses may also be placed upon someone by spells, incantations, or similar practices such as voodoo or other forms of witchcraft. Galatians 3:13 speaks of redemption from the curse of the law through Christ’s having “become a curse” for us. Usually believers are immune from curses made against them, unless they have given grounds to the devil (Eph 4:27). Such grounds may be provided through drugs, illicit sex, the occult, or any other avenue forbidden in the Bible. Involvement with tarot cards, horoscopes, or any other form of fortune-telling may give demons opportunity to enter. Such contacts may seem innocuous, but Satan utilizes the smallest foothold to gain advantage over people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Manifestation\">Manifestation<\/p>\n<p>Often demons prefer to hide rather than to make their presence known, for then they can exercise control without hindrance. When they do manifest themselves, often when challenged, all sorts of strange and frightening things may occur. They possess supernatural powers (cf. Rv 16:14), which they exhibit outright or through their victims. The Gerasene demoniac had superhuman physical strength, so that he could not be bound with fetters or chains (Mk 5:4-5); he lived in tombs and went about night and day screaming and injuring himself with stones.<\/p>\n<p>The spirit in the demonized boy in Mark 9 rendered him dumb and deaf, threw him on the ground, and caused him to roll about and to foam at the mouth (9:18-20). The demon caused him to grind his teeth and become rigid; he had tried to kill the boy by throwing him into the fire and into the water on various occasions (vv 18-22). Before leaving at the command of Jesus, the demon cried out (cf. Mk 1:26), convulsed the boy terribly, and left him lying like a corpse. Jesus took him by the hand and raised him up (9:27). Similar manifestations take place today.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Exorcism\">Exorcism<\/p>\n<p>Casting out demons, or exorcism, was a regular and frequent part of the ministry of Jesus, and he taught and commanded his followers to do the same. This command has never been abrogated, and the ministry of deliverance should be even more important today, when the forces of evil are so rampant. The following principles are derived from the practice of Jesus, the Scriptures, and personal observation and involvement.<\/p>\n<p>1. Jesus spoke to demons and commanded them to come out (Mk 1:25; 9:25). He cast them out “with a word” (Mt 8:16). Jesus gave his followers authority to use his name in casting them out and used this as a sign of the believer (Mk 16:17). His name is not a magical formula, and its use depends on the relationship between the Lord and the person using his name, as the sons of Sceva found out to their dismay (Acts 19:11-18).<\/p>\n<li>2. Jesus cast out demons by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power to heal all who were oppressed by the devil (Lk 4:18-19; Acts 10:38).<\/li>\n<li>3. The Lord gave clear teaching about “the binding of the strong man” in deliverance (Mt 12:29; Mk 3:27) and about binding and loosing (Mt 18:18).<\/li>\n<li>4. Prayer is an important weapon in spiritual warfare. When the disciples asked (Mk 9:28) why they could not cast out a demon, Jesus replied that this kind comes out only with prayer.<\/li>\n<li>5. Revelation 12:11 testifies to the power of “the blood of the Lamb” in overcoming Satan. Demons do not like to hear of the blood of Jesus and often become agitated at the mention of it.<\/li>\n<li>6. God has equipped the believer with armor for defense in spiritual battle (Eph 6:10-17).<\/li>\n<li>7. The Lord answered Satan with correctly applied texts from the Bible. We have been given the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God (Eph 6:17; Heb 4:12), as a means of defense and for attack against the enemy.<\/li>\n<li>8. We must come against the hosts of hell from our position in the heavenly places (Eph 2:6), not from our limited earthly station.<\/li>\n<li>9. We must recognize that the ultimate victory has already been won by Jesus, who came to destroy the works of the devil (1 Jn 3:8) and to destroy him who has the power of death (Heb 2:14-16). When Jesus cried out on the cross, “It is finished,” he meant that the redemptive work was done; when he arose from the dead, he demonstrated his power over death. We win only as we enter into his victory.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Demon.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEMON-POSSESSION Demonic occupation of a human being. The term “possession” is misleading and is not the best translation for the Greek word daimonizomai, which literally means to be “demonized” and can often best be translated as “to have a demon.” The noun form is “demoniac.” Demons can enter the body of a person (Lk 8:30; 22:3), in order to control the individual’s thoughts and actions. Sometimes a distinction is made between demonic oppression and demonic possession; this supposedly diffe...","summary_en":"DEMON-POSSESSION Demonic occupation of a human being. The term “possession” is misleading and is not the best translation for the Greek word daimonizomai, which literally means to be “demonized” and can often best be translated as “to have a demon.” The noun form is “demoniac.” Demons can enter the body of a person (Lk 8:30; 22:3), in order to control the individual’s thoughts and actions. Sometimes a distinction is made between demonic oppression and demonic possession; this supposedly diffe...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9727,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Disease","title_en":"Disease","content_ro":"<h3>DISEASE<\/h3>\n<p>Term used in Scripture synonymously with sickness, infirmity, illness, plague, and pestilence. However, plague and pestilence are generally used when there are large numbers of victims, as in epidemics. “Pestilence” literally means “destruction” and usually describes an epidemic with a high mortality rate. “Affliction” and “torment” are other terms that may include disease, but are broader and are not used synonymously with disease.<\/p>\n<p>During the time the Bible was written, people did not have a detailed concept of anatomy or of how the specific organs of the body functioned. Disease was thought of as abnormal, something that limits one’s ability to function with strength and vitality. The Hebrew word translated “sickness” as a noun means “to be weak” in its cognate verb form. The sick man by the pool of Bethesda is described as being “impotent” (Jn 5:7, <span>kjv<\/span>), unable to get around by himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SourcesofDisease\">Sources of Disease<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, disease has four sources: (1) God, (2) Satan, (3) sins of ancestors, and (4) breaking of physical, mental\/emotional, or moral laws of nature.<\/p>\n<h5>God<\/h5>\n<p>All early peoples attributed events and phenomena to the supernatural, either to various gods or to evil spirits. The Hebrews were different by being strong monotheists, attributing all phenomena to the one true God who had revealed himself to them (Is 45:21). God was responsible for everything, including disease and evil (v 7). This same God could also give material blessings, health, and heal all diseases (Ps 103:3). To the Hebrews, God could give health or sickness, and in either case, he had his purpose or reason.<\/p>\n<p>One purpose of disease was punishment for wrongdoing (2 Sm 24:1, 12-16; 1 Cor 10:8). In the Hebrew mind, even when the immediate cause of the disease and death was obvious—as in many poisonous snakes biting people in the camp—the response was not to kill all the snakes but to pray to God for forgiveness (Nm 21:4-9). Leprosy, which literally means “a smiting,” was a devastating disease sent by God to punish individuals who sinned (Nm 12; 2 Kgs 5:27).<\/p>\n<p>God also sent disease to demonstrate his power or to protect his people. The 10 plagues in Egypt illustrate the former; the elimination of Sennacherib’s army, the latter (2 Kgs 19:34-36).<\/p>\n<h5>Satan<\/h5>\n<p>Satan and other evil spirits could also be responsible for disease. In the biblical scheme of things, Satan’s ability to bring disease is in the permissive will of God. The restriction on Satan’s capacity for harm is clearly spelled out in the case of Job (Jb 1:12). The message of the NT is also clear that, despite cases of demonpossession and of people acting under Satan’s influence, Satan’s time is finite and his ultimate total defeat and destruction are certain.<\/p>\n<h5>Sins of Ancestors<\/h5>\n<p>Sickness could also come about because of the sins of one’s ancestors (Ex 20:5; Lv 26:29; 1 Kgs 17:18; Jb 21:19; Lam 5:7). The most striking example of this is the death of David’s son as a result of his sin with Bathsheba (2 Sm 12:15). This concept of the origin of disease continued into NT times and was familiar to the disciples of Jesus (Jn 9:2).<\/p>\n<h5>Violation of Natural Laws<\/h5>\n<p>This idea sets the Hebrews apart from the other peoples of their day. With the understanding that disease can follow the violation of fixed physical, mental\/emotional, and moral laws comes the idea of personal accountability in obeying these laws and avoiding disease. A person is responsible for his and the community’s health and is not merely a passive victim of supernatural forces.<\/p>\n<p>Based on this concept, Moses set up elaborate codes of behavior to maintain personal health and the health of the community. The Mosaic law covers the areas of diet, personal hygiene, Sabbath observance, sanitary regulations in the camp, cleanliness, and sexual relations. In following these natural laws established by God, the Hebrews could expect freedom from disease (Ex 15:26) and long life (Prv 3:1-2). These health laws of Moses make a lot of sense from a public health point of view even today and are far more rational than the approach of any other ancient people.<\/p>\n<p>Another major consequence of understanding that disease can follow the breaking of the laws of nature is the shift away from the priest and toward physicians when looking for cures. As long as diseases were of supernatural origin, there was no basis for attempting to learn about disease processes in the search for cures. The Hebrews were familiar with physicians in Egypt (Gn 50:2), where they seem to have functioned as embalmers. Physicians were practicing in Israel throughout its history, but only gradually developed the capacity to be of much help (2 Chr 16:12; Jer 8:22; Mk 5:26; Col 4:14). While validating the use of physicians for sick people (Mt 9:12) and of drugs for medicinal purposes (Prv 31:6; 1 Tm 5:23), the Scriptures emphasize the role of the Christian community and its elders in ministering to the sick (Jas 5:14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusChristandDisease\">Jesus Christ and Disease<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s approach to people with disease was distinctly different than that of the OT. He was nonjudgmental, interacting with them as people of worth, not as social outcasts. He was full of genuine compassion for them as suffering people—touching them, comforting them, healing them, and speaking normally and naturally with them.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently thought of disease as a hindrance that prevented people from being the whole persons they were created to be. When confronted by a woman with a severe back deformity of 18 years duration, he healed her, saying she had been “bound by Satan” (Lk 13:16). His healing of incurable diseases was one of the proofs he offered that he was the Messiah (Lk 7:19-23). His ministry was directed toward releasing men and women to live life more abundantly (Jn 10:10). He did not fully subscribe to the punitive concept of disease (9:3). When a leper mentioned the possibility that it might not be God’s will for him to be well, Jesus healed him instantly (Mk 1:40; Lk 5:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was always concerned with the person’s total health or wholeness, rather than merely the symptoms of disease. He frequently dealt with spiritual issues first, even though the sick person was brought to him for a physical problem. His conversation with the Samaritan woman at the well focused on the basic conflicts in her disturbed personality (Jn 4:5-30). And the Sermon on the Mount, which basically deals with right attitudes and motives for human behavior, would greatly reduce personal and social suffering if it were followed. To Jesus, health is more than the mere absence of physical and mental disease; it is whole persons being all that they were meant to be.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Pestilence; Plague.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DISEASE<\/h3>\n<p>Term used in Scripture synonymously with sickness, infirmity, illness, plague, and pestilence. However, plague and pestilence are generally used when there are large numbers of victims, as in epidemics. “Pestilence” literally means “destruction” and usually describes an epidemic with a high mortality rate. “Affliction” and “torment” are other terms that may include disease, but are broader and are not used synonymously with disease.<\/p>\n<p>During the time the Bible was written, people did not have a detailed concept of anatomy or of how the specific organs of the body functioned. Disease was thought of as abnormal, something that limits one’s ability to function with strength and vitality. The Hebrew word translated “sickness” as a noun means “to be weak” in its cognate verb form. The sick man by the pool of Bethesda is described as being “impotent” (Jn 5:7, <span>kjv<\/span>), unable to get around by himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SourcesofDisease\">Sources of Disease<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, disease has four sources: (1) God, (2) Satan, (3) sins of ancestors, and (4) breaking of physical, mental\/emotional, or moral laws of nature.<\/p>\n<h5>God<\/h5>\n<p>All early peoples attributed events and phenomena to the supernatural, either to various gods or to evil spirits. The Hebrews were different by being strong monotheists, attributing all phenomena to the one true God who had revealed himself to them (Is 45:21). God was responsible for everything, including disease and evil (v 7). This same God could also give material blessings, health, and heal all diseases (Ps 103:3). To the Hebrews, God could give health or sickness, and in either case, he had his purpose or reason.<\/p>\n<p>One purpose of disease was punishment for wrongdoing (2 Sm 24:1, 12-16; 1 Cor 10:8). In the Hebrew mind, even when the immediate cause of the disease and death was obvious—as in many poisonous snakes biting people in the camp—the response was not to kill all the snakes but to pray to God for forgiveness (Nm 21:4-9). Leprosy, which literally means “a smiting,” was a devastating disease sent by God to punish individuals who sinned (Nm 12; 2 Kgs 5:27).<\/p>\n<p>God also sent disease to demonstrate his power or to protect his people. The 10 plagues in Egypt illustrate the former; the elimination of Sennacherib’s army, the latter (2 Kgs 19:34-36).<\/p>\n<h5>Satan<\/h5>\n<p>Satan and other evil spirits could also be responsible for disease. In the biblical scheme of things, Satan’s ability to bring disease is in the permissive will of God. The restriction on Satan’s capacity for harm is clearly spelled out in the case of Job (Jb 1:12). The message of the NT is also clear that, despite cases of demonpossession and of people acting under Satan’s influence, Satan’s time is finite and his ultimate total defeat and destruction are certain.<\/p>\n<h5>Sins of Ancestors<\/h5>\n<p>Sickness could also come about because of the sins of one’s ancestors (Ex 20:5; Lv 26:29; 1 Kgs 17:18; Jb 21:19; Lam 5:7). The most striking example of this is the death of David’s son as a result of his sin with Bathsheba (2 Sm 12:15). This concept of the origin of disease continued into NT times and was familiar to the disciples of Jesus (Jn 9:2).<\/p>\n<h5>Violation of Natural Laws<\/h5>\n<p>This idea sets the Hebrews apart from the other peoples of their day. With the understanding that disease can follow the violation of fixed physical, mental\/emotional, and moral laws comes the idea of personal accountability in obeying these laws and avoiding disease. A person is responsible for his and the community’s health and is not merely a passive victim of supernatural forces.<\/p>\n<p>Based on this concept, Moses set up elaborate codes of behavior to maintain personal health and the health of the community. The Mosaic law covers the areas of diet, personal hygiene, Sabbath observance, sanitary regulations in the camp, cleanliness, and sexual relations. In following these natural laws established by God, the Hebrews could expect freedom from disease (Ex 15:26) and long life (Prv 3:1-2). These health laws of Moses make a lot of sense from a public health point of view even today and are far more rational than the approach of any other ancient people.<\/p>\n<p>Another major consequence of understanding that disease can follow the breaking of the laws of nature is the shift away from the priest and toward physicians when looking for cures. As long as diseases were of supernatural origin, there was no basis for attempting to learn about disease processes in the search for cures. The Hebrews were familiar with physicians in Egypt (Gn 50:2), where they seem to have functioned as embalmers. Physicians were practicing in Israel throughout its history, but only gradually developed the capacity to be of much help (2 Chr 16:12; Jer 8:22; Mk 5:26; Col 4:14). While validating the use of physicians for sick people (Mt 9:12) and of drugs for medicinal purposes (Prv 31:6; 1 Tm 5:23), the Scriptures emphasize the role of the Christian community and its elders in ministering to the sick (Jas 5:14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusChristandDisease\">Jesus Christ and Disease<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s approach to people with disease was distinctly different than that of the OT. He was nonjudgmental, interacting with them as people of worth, not as social outcasts. He was full of genuine compassion for them as suffering people—touching them, comforting them, healing them, and speaking normally and naturally with them.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently thought of disease as a hindrance that prevented people from being the whole persons they were created to be. When confronted by a woman with a severe back deformity of 18 years duration, he healed her, saying she had been “bound by Satan” (Lk 13:16). His healing of incurable diseases was one of the proofs he offered that he was the Messiah (Lk 7:19-23). His ministry was directed toward releasing men and women to live life more abundantly (Jn 10:10). He did not fully subscribe to the punitive concept of disease (9:3). When a leper mentioned the possibility that it might not be God’s will for him to be well, Jesus healed him instantly (Mk 1:40; Lk 5:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was always concerned with the person’s total health or wholeness, rather than merely the symptoms of disease. He frequently dealt with spiritual issues first, even though the sick person was brought to him for a physical problem. His conversation with the Samaritan woman at the well focused on the basic conflicts in her disturbed personality (Jn 4:5-30). And the Sermon on the Mount, which basically deals with right attitudes and motives for human behavior, would greatly reduce personal and social suffering if it were followed. To Jesus, health is more than the mere absence of physical and mental disease; it is whole persons being all that they were meant to be.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Pestilence; Plague.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DISEASE Term used in Scripture synonymously with sickness, infirmity, illness, plague, and pestilence. However, plague and pestilence are generally used when there are large numbers of victims, as in epidemics. “Pestilence” literally means “destruction” and usually describes an epidemic with a high mortality rate. “Affliction” and “torment” are other terms that may include disease, but are broader and are not used synonymously with disease. During the time the Bible was written, people did no...","summary_en":"DISEASE Term used in Scripture synonymously with sickness, infirmity, illness, plague, and pestilence. However, plague and pestilence are generally used when there are large numbers of victims, as in epidemics. “Pestilence” literally means “destruction” and usually describes an epidemic with a high mortality rate. “Affliction” and “torment” are other terms that may include disease, but are broader and are not used synonymously with disease. During the time the Bible was written, people did no...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":10220,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"El*","title_en":"El*","content_ro":"<h3>EL*<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient Semitic name for deity, perhaps meaning “power” (cf. Gn 17:1); used by the Hebrews generally in a poetic sense to denote the true God of Israel. The same word was used for the senior Canaanite god and the god in Ugaritic mythology. The “Il” or “El” of ancient Canaanite mythology (before 3500 <span>BC<\/span> in the region of Syria) was not as active as the god Baal, who struggled with Death and triumphed over Chaos. But Il was the father god of the Canaanite pantheon. OT critics have suggested that the Hebrews adopted the clan gods of the Canaanites, including Il. Yet Phoenician and Ugaritic literature use Il in the feminine form for the names of goddesses. The Hebrew avoids such usage. El is combined with other adjectives to describe the numerous attributes of God; for example, God Most High (Gn 14:18-24), the seeing God (16:13), the jealous God (Ex 20:5), the forgiving God (Neh 9:17), and the gracious God (v 31).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; God, Names of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EL*<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient Semitic name for deity, perhaps meaning “power” (cf. Gn 17:1); used by the Hebrews generally in a poetic sense to denote the true God of Israel. The same word was used for the senior Canaanite god and the god in Ugaritic mythology. The “Il” or “El” of ancient Canaanite mythology (before 3500 <span>BC<\/span> in the region of Syria) was not as active as the god Baal, who struggled with Death and triumphed over Chaos. But Il was the father god of the Canaanite pantheon. OT critics have suggested that the Hebrews adopted the clan gods of the Canaanites, including Il. Yet Phoenician and Ugaritic literature use Il in the feminine form for the names of goddesses. The Hebrew avoids such usage. El is combined with other adjectives to describe the numerous attributes of God; for example, God Most High (Gn 14:18-24), the seeing God (16:13), the jealous God (Ex 20:5), the forgiving God (Neh 9:17), and the gracious God (v 31).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; God, Names of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EL* Ancient Semitic name for deity, perhaps meaning “power” (cf. Gn 17:1); used by the Hebrews generally in a poetic sense to denote the true God of Israel. The same word was used for the senior Canaanite god and the god in Ugaritic mythology. The “Il” or “El” of ancient Canaanite mythology (before 3500 BC in the region of Syria) was not as active as the god Baal, who struggled with Death and triumphed over Chaos. But Il was the father god of the Canaanite pantheon. OT critics have suggested ...","summary_en":"EL* Ancient Semitic name for deity, perhaps meaning “power” (cf. Gn 17:1); used by the Hebrews generally in a poetic sense to denote the true God of Israel. The same word was used for the senior Canaanite god and the god in Ugaritic mythology. The “Il” or “El” of ancient Canaanite mythology (before 3500 BC in the region of Syria) was not as active as the god Baal, who struggled with Death and triumphed over Chaos. But Il was the father god of the Canaanite pantheon. OT critics have suggested ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11645,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ezekiel","title_en":"Book of Ezekiel","content_ro":"<h3>EZEKIEL, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the temple to his fellow exiles. Settled at Tel-abib, on the canal of Kebar, the thousands of deportees eked out a meager existence. They hoped for a speedy return to Judah and a change for the better in the international situation. Their hope was enflamed by the spirited preaching of false prophets, likened to jackals among the ruins (13:4). They piously said, “The Lord declares . . . ,” but they were actually self-commissioned (v 6). They deceived the people with a message of peace at a time when God’s judgment was about to be poured out on his people (v 10). They had led the people to distrust prophecy to such an extent that a proverb circulated among the people that “the days grow long, and every vision comes to nought” (12:22). Much time had passed since visions of God’s judgment had been given to the people, and nothing could be interpreted as a fulfillment of those visions. Ezekiel was called to serve his community by symbolic acts, visions, and verbal messages in order to convince the people that God’s judgment was imminent (v 23).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandBackground\">Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of the prophet Ezekiel can be understood best against the backdrop of his time. If, as the church father Origen believed, the vague reference “in the thirtieth year” (1:1) marks the prophet’s age at the time of his first vision, Ezekiel was born during the rule of King Josiah of Judah (c. 640–609 <span>BC<\/span>). Josiah was the grandson of King Manasseh, whose sacrilegious acts had brought God’s judgment on the kingdom of Judah (2 Kgs 21:10-15).<\/p>\n<p>Though Judah’s political situation was perilous, Josiah led the nation in a radical reformation that began with the finding of the “Book of the Law” (2 Kgs 22) in the year that Ezekiel was born (c. 621 <span>BC<\/span>). Idolatry was done away with and the people turned back to God, but God’s judgment on Judah was unchangeable (23:26-27). Josiah erred in trying to make Judah a kingdom with which other states had to reckon. He was threatened when the Egyptian pharaoh Neco passed through Judah on his way to aid the weakened Assyrian kingdom. Josiah marched to meet the Egyptian forces, but his troops were unable to stand against the Egyptians, and he died in battle (v 29). Egypt took control of Judah, and Pharaoh Neco placed Jehoiakim in power over Jerusalem. Egyptian control did not last long, however, for in 605 <span>BC<\/span> Egypt and Assyria were defeated by Babylonia’s king Nebuchadnezzar at Carchemish. The Babylonians then pushed south to Jerusalem, and the first deportation of Judean leaders (among them the prophet Daniel) took place.<\/p>\n<p>Jehoiakim was permitted to continue ruling over Judah as a vassal king of Nebuchadnezzar. But his dealings with Egypt brought the emperor’s wrath down upon him. Before the Babylonians could address the Judean situation, Jehoiakim died and his son Jehoiachin was crowned. When the Babylonian forces arrived at the gates of Jerusalem, Jehoiachin and thousands of the aristocracy were taken to Babylon (2 Kgs 24:10-17). Among those deportees was Ezekiel, then about 25 years old.<\/p>\n<p>Although the book says otherwise, many scholars think that Ezekiel lived and taught in Judah for the duration of the siege and the fall of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>). They conclude this from Ezekiel’s familiarity with idolatry in the temple and his vivid descriptions of Jerusalem’s last days (Ez 8:11). Others believe that Ezekiel ministered both to the exiled community and to the Judeans living in Judah. Neither interpretation does full justice to the claims of the book itself. Ezekiel was exiled in 597 <span>BC<\/span>. He was called to bring God’s word to the deportees at Tel-abib; he was granted a vision of the horrible practices in the temple court; and he was familiar with Jerusalem and Judah from having lived there and from reports on affairs in Jerusalem coming to the exiles through messengers. Jeremiah, Ezekiel’s contemporary, was prophesying in Jerusalem, but there is no evidence that Jeremiah and Ezekiel knew of each other’s ministry. If Ezekiel had brought God’s word to Jerusalem during the siege, some reference to Jeremiah might appear in his writings. If Jeremiah was supported by Ezekiel’s ministry in Jerusalem, he probably would have included a positive word for his colleague in his book. The book of Ezekiel plainly says that Ezekiel lived and preached in exile (see 1:1-3; 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The prophecy of Ezekiel is easily outlined by subject matter and chronology. The chronology of the period permits a division before and after 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Jerusalem). Chapters 1–24 cover the pre-586 ministry of Ezekiel, whereas chapters 33–48 represent his post-586 ministry. Chapters 25–32 (oracles against the foreign nations) function as a transition between the book’s two major divisions.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s outline according to subject matter divides into four parts: Ezekiel’s call (1:1–3:21); prophecies of judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27); oracles against the nations (25:1–32:32); and proclamation of hope (33:1–48:35).<\/p>\n<h5>Ezekiel’s Call (1:1–3:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The prophet’s call in one sense was similar to that of Isaiah and Jeremiah. Isaiah received his mission in a vision of God’s glory in the temple (Is 6). Jeremiah was called unexpectedly in his youth, and received signs that solemnly set forth the nature of his mission (Jer 1:11-15). The call of Ezekiel combined those two elements. Revelation of God’s glory to the prophet at the same time revealed the nature of the prophet’s mission. Ezekiel’s call contained a full description of God’s glory. Isaiah briefly stated that he saw the Lord enthroned in the temple, and he concentrated on the seraphim representing and magnifying God’s glory. Ezekiel elaborated on the revelation of the Lord’s glory as well as on the ministering angels who went before the Lord as part of his royal entourage. The vision of God’s glory, though difficult to understand, is the key to the book of Ezekiel.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel, as a priest, was concerned about the future of the temple. That sacred place had been ordained by God as his home among his people. The glory, presence, and holiness of God were symbolized in the temple (see 1 Kgs 8:10-11). In exile Ezekiel could not serve his people as a priest, for they were far from Jerusalem, the city God had chosen. Against all expectations the Lord revealed himself to Ezekiel in the land of Babylon. In calling Ezekiel to a prophetic ministry, God assured his servant that he had not forsaken his people, even though they had been banished from the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet’s vision began with a storm. As a large cloud approached from the north, Ezekiel saw a brightness surrounding the cloud, four creatures, and four wheels. The combination of creatures and wheels suggests that the Lord appeared in a chariot. God’s chariot is a familiar OT representation of his coming in judgment (see Is 66:15-16). The wheels within wheels and the position of the four living creatures may signify God’s total control over the whole earth, so he could move his “chariot of judgment” in any direction. It is also possible that the living creatures with their four faces, and the wheels full of eyes, may be separate symbols showing that God sees all that happens and thereby knows the plight of the exiles. In the vision the prophet’s attention was drawn to a throne above the heads of the creatures. On the throne was “the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1:28). In his vision of God’s coming in judgment, Ezekiel received his call to the prophetic ministry: “Son of man, I send you to the people of Israel, to a nation of rebels who have rebelled against me” (2:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). During a dark hour of Israel’s history, Ezekiel had to prophesy, rebuke his fellow exiles (3:11), and be responsible as a watchman over the house of Israel (3:17; cf. 33:1-9). Symbolic of his mission was a scroll filled with lamentations and woe (2:9-10), which when eaten became sweet as honey (3:1-3). Difficult as the mission was, God’s presence and the certain fulfillment of the prophecies sweetened Ezekiel’s task. Such encouragement was intended to take away any fear of the rebellious Israelites (2:6-7). Instead of being elated with his mission, however, Ezekiel became despondent.<\/p>\n<p>A week later, the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel to remind him of his important role as a watchman (3:16-17). Ezekiel became responsible for Israel as a nation, not just for individuals. His witness to Israel had the express aim of national repentance (vv 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was confined to his house by God (3:24-25). The house ministry was to be carried on only with those Israelites who sought God’s will, for the Lord had abandoned those who continued in their apostasy. The prophetic word would not help the apostates (v 26). The principle of Ezekiel’s ministry is found in 3:27: “Whenever I give you a message, I will loosen your tongue and let you speak. Then you will say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span> says!’ Some of them will listen, but some will ignore you, for they are rebels” (<span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Mt 11:15; 13:43).<\/p>\n<h5>Prophecies of Judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Symbolism figures prominently in Ezekiel’s writing. His priestly background and preparation probably suited him to receive and communicate God’s word in symbolic acts and speech. Chapters 4 and 5 contain four symbolic acts: (1) Jerusalem’s siege is portrayed on a brick (Ez 4:1-3); (2) Israel’s iniquity is represented by Ezekiel’s lying on his sides (vv 4-8); (3) Jerusalem’s grief and horror in the last days of the siege are represented by Ezekiel’s food and drink (vv 9-17); (4) Jerusalem’s fate is represented by the prophet’s hair being cut off (5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s instructions were further illuminated by God’s explanation of Israel’s apostasy (5:6-7) and his judgment on Israel (vv 8-12). The judgment will last until the Israelites admit that in covenant faithfulness their Lord has inflicted righteous judgment on them (v 13).<\/p>\n<p>God would direct his judgment first against the people and the city of Jerusalem. Next in line were the mountains of Israel (ch 6) and the land (ch 7). God’s wrath included the cities and cultic sites in the hill country of Judah, leaving no protection for the people (6:3-6). Abominations that were practiced throughout the land caused God’s judgment to fall on the land as well as on the people (7:2-3, 10-11, 23). But because God is righteous, he judged the people according to their ways of life, desiring that they would once more acknowledge him as their God (7:27).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet then (chs 8–11) focused on the abominations practiced in Jerusalem, particularly idolatry in the temple courts, which caused the judgment announced in chapters 1–7. An idol had been erected in the inner court (8:3-5). By the wall of the court, elders of the city were paying homage to the idols that surrounded the court (vv 11-12). Closer to the temple, women were weeping for the god Tammuz (v 14), and men were worshiping the sun (v 16). In preparation for the ultimate judgment on the land, the prophet placed a mark on the foreheads of the few faithful Israelites so that they would survive (9:4-6). Then (ch 10), the glory of God, which had filled the temple from the time of Solomon, gradually left: “Then the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> went up from the city and stopped above the mountain to the east” (11:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people, now without divine protection, were being handed over to the Babylonians (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>The message of doom for Jerusalem contains four elements of hope: restoration of the people (11:17), restoration of the land (v 17), purification of the people (v 18), and renewed fellowship between God and his people (vv 19-20). The prophet develops those four themes in chapters 33–48.<\/p>\n<p>The visions of chapters 10 and 11 made clear that when God removed his presence from Jerusalem, the exile was approaching. Those who were already in Babylon were unwilling to believe that such an extensive devastation of Jerusalem would happen or that the people would all be exiled and the land become desolate.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel acted out the certainty of God’s word of judgment by packing his bags and showing the baggage to his fellow exiles. First, he placed the bags in the courtyard outside his modest home. Next, he went out by making a hole through the wall. Finally, the prophet walked about the settlement with his bags in full view. Skeptical observers did not understand Ezekiel and probably thought he was crazy. The believers who saw him understood. His strange actions dramatized how the king’s aides would do all they could to help King Zedekiah escape just before the fall of Jerusalem. Second Kings 25 tells how the king and his soldiers left Jerusalem for the wilderness, to be overtaken by the Babylonians at Jericho and brought before Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah. As a captive, Zedekiah witnessed the murder of his sons; then his eyes were put out, and he was sent into exile with the other Judeans (cf. Ez 12:13). The prophet’s explanation concluded with a word of comfort. Because of his covenant with Abraham, God promised not to destroy the people completely. A remnant who overcame the sword, famine, and pestilence would live to tell the story of God’s judgment (vv 15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel further illustrated the nation’s plight by eating as though full of fear, depicting the great trauma that all of Judah’s inhabitants would soon undergo.<\/p>\n<p>Both symbolic acts, packing his belongings and eating, emphasized the truthfulness of God’s word. The people needed to face the nature of their God: He is magnificent, and when he speaks, his words are powerful and come to pass. Thus, the devastation of the land and the people’s exile were a fulfillment of God’s word through the prophets. The judgment was meant to produce a recognition of the Lord, repentance, and a return to God. Some in Judah doubted the efficacy of God’s prophecies, saying, “Time passes, making a liar of every prophet” (12:22). Others thought God’s word would come true in the distant future (v 27). The prevailing attitude of distrust in God’s word had been stimulated by the popular preaching of false prophets (ch 13). Never commissioned by the Lord, they deceived God’s people by lying and misdirecting them with messages of peace (vv 8-10). Wickedness, lying, and deceit were encouraged among the people by such false prophets (v 22). The magnitude of their sin and their great responsibility for Judah’s fall would be matched by the Lord’s heavy judgment. Yet God would save his people from such evil and will prepare a righteous nation with whom to maintain his covenant (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>The certainty of the judgment has been connected with the truthfulness of God’s word. Ezekiel’s difficult task of affirming the doom of Jerusalem to stubborn hearers was intensified by the people’s idolatry. Their whole way of life denied the existence of God. They practiced idolatry in their worship, and they had set up idols in their hearts (14:3). Before the covenant with God could be restored, they had to be purified from their idolatry. Even so, repentance would not guarantee immunity from judgment. Sword, famine, wild beasts, and plagues would ravage the population (v 21). After the execution of his judgment, God would take back those survivors who had turned to him for mercy. God would surely accomplish all that he intended for his people’s good (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>In chapters 15–17 Ezekiel uses three parables to set forth the apostasy, present uselessness, and judgment of Israel. Jerusalem and Judah are compared to a piece of charred wood, an adulterous woman, and a vine.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 15 reviews Jerusalem’s case. Jerusalem is compared to a piece of wood, both ends of which have been charred with fire, so that the wood is of no value. As the whole piece of wood is burned instead of being saved, so Jerusalem would undergo complete devastation (15:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 16 presents God’s case against Jerusalem from a different perspective, stressing his care for Jerusalem in the past. The beginnings of her history are compared to the birth of a female child, left abandoned by her mother (16:3-5). God adopted the child and washed and clothed her (vv 6-7). He made a covenant with her (v 8), making her his own possession. He generously gave her all the fine things of life (vv 9-13). In the height of her development, Jerusalem’s fame spread to the nations (v 14). Her self-reliance made her a spiritual prostitute as she took up the religious practices and way of life of the nations (vv 15-34). The cities of Sodom (Gn 19) and Samaria (2 Kgs 17:6), known for their immorality, are called Jerusalem’s sisters (Ez 16:46). They had been judged by God, but the corruption of those cities was little compared to the lewdness of Jerusalem (vv 48-51). Thus, Jerusalem also would surely fall and become desolate. Yet Ezekiel anticipates the judgment’s final outcome; Jerusalem will be restored to covenantal blessing (vv 62-63) after her repentance.<\/p>\n<p>The third parable (ch 17) focuses on God’s sovereignty over political developments. Assyria was no longer a power to be reckoned with. Babylon and Egypt both exercised dominion, although the balance of power was veering in favor of Babylon. Their extension of power is likened to an eagle. Nebuchadnezzar, pictured as “a great eagle with broad wings full of many-colored feathers,” took control over the affairs of Judah by removing Jehoiachin, “the highest branch of a cedar tree,” from office and by exiling him with young leaders of the Judean state (17:3-4). Ezekiel was among them. Nebuchadnezzar let the Judeans control their own affairs under Zedekiah but expected them to be subject to Babylon and not to any other power. But Judah (likened to a vine) tried to ally itself with Pharaoh Hophra of Egypt, “another great eagle with broad wings and full plumage” (v 7), against Nebuchadnezzar. Zedekiah’s folly in turning to Egypt would cause Nebuchadnezzar to pull up the vine by its roots and make it wither (vv 9-10). In explaining the parable, God told the exiles that Judah’s fall was a result of its unfaithfulness to King Nebuchadnezzar, to whom Judah owed allegiance by covenant (vv 13-18). Judah’s unfaithfulness thus extended to all of its relationships: religious, cultural, and political. After the exile, God promised, he would restore his people to their land under a Messiah, “a tender shoot” (v 22). The messianic rule is signified by the young twig, which when planted in the land will become a magnificent cedar, giving shade and protection to the birds. Chapter 17 is an inspiring affirmation of the sovereignty of God in human affairs (“All the trees will know that it is I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, who cuts down the tall tree and helps the short tree to grow tall. It is I who makes the green tree wither and gives new life to the dead tree”—17:24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 18–22 contain Ezekiel’s oracles to Judah, its leaders, and the exiles. First, he enunciates God’s standard of righteousness: “The person who sins will be the one who dies” (18:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people are charging God with injustice, for they believe themselves to be under God’s judgment for the sins of their ancestors (vv 25-29). Although the Ten Commandments do say that God may punish “the sins of their parents to the third and the fourth generations” (Ex 20:5, <span>nlt<\/span>), the prophet vindicates God’s justice, telling the people that they are not being punished merely for their ancestors’ sin. Each person must be directly accountable to God; the sinner will die in wickedness, and the righteous will live by righteousness. A life of faithfulness to God’s moral and civil law will be rewarded (Ez 18:5-9). Even if one’s father was a sinner, the father’s sin is not transferable (vv 14-18). God is ready to forgive any sinner who repents (v 27). The prophet’s vindication of God’s justice becomes a call to repentance. The sinners in Judah and in exile were thus warned of the consequences of their evil, and were exhorted to return to their God and his standard of right and wrong (vv 31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 19 contains two parables in the form of a lamentation. The first portrays a lioness and her two cubs. The lioness is Hamutal, the wife of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:31), who bore two sons: Jehoahaz and Zedekiah. Jehoahaz is referred to in Ezekiel 19:3-4 as a cub who grew up and was taken to Egypt (by Pharaoh Neco in 608 <span>BC<\/span>; see 2 Kgs 23:31-34). Zedekiah succeeded to the throne ten years later. In the lamentation the prophet imaginatively represents Zedekiah as a young cub who is ultimately taken to Babylon as a rebellious ruler (Ez 19:7-9). The second parable changes the imagery to a vine, representing Israel (v 10). In its early days God blessed Israel with strong rulers, but now the vine was wilting as Zedekiah irresponsibly led Judah to its last days. Ezekiel’s lamentation stresses the lack of a good candidate for the throne and the lack of life in the vine (vv 13-14).<\/p>\n<p>In chapter 20 the prophet concludes God’s argument against his people. He reviews the history of Israel’s past, starting with God’s self-revelation in Egypt (20:5-6). He took to himself a stubborn nation, tied to idolatry (v 8) and prone to apostasy (vv 13, 21). Israel wanted to be one of the great nations (v 32) instead of a sanctified people (v 12). As a result of its spiritual hardness, Israel is dispersed to live among the nations (v 35). Yet God had a solemn covenant with Israel, made by oath to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. On the basis of that covenant, God will reach out with compassion to those who repent of their sinful ways (vv 37-44). In Israel’s judgment and restoration the nations will see the holiness of God, which does not tolerate unfaithfulness in Israel (v 41).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s prophecies alternate between God’s judgment on Israel’s sin and his restoration of Israel, spanning the bridge between Israel’s past and future. In view of the people’s doubts of the coming judgment on Jerusalem, he stresses the necessity of judgment and the need for repentance. Still, the future restoration of a remnant is touched upon here and there as the counterpart of his message of judgment. After announcing the fall of Jerusalem, the prophet shifts from a message of judgment to one of hope.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet returns to the proclamation of judgment in four oracles (20:45–21:32). He speaks against the Negev Desert area (20:45-49), Jerusalem and the land of Israel (21:2-17, 20-27), and against the Ammonites (vv 28-32). God permitted the sword of Nebuchadnezzar to be his instrument of judgment upon the Judeans (v 19). He would see to the judgment on the Ammonites. The Judeans would recover their previous glory, but the memory of the Ammonites would perish (vv 27, 32). The oracle against the Ammonites anticipates a larger treatise on Israel’s other neighbors: Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, Sidon, and Egypt (chs 25–29).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 22–24 contain a renewed series of indictments against Jerusalem. Jerusalem’s religious and civil leadership (the prophets, priests, and princes) are corrupt, and the people have followed their example (22:25-30). The parable of the two sisters, Oholah and Oholibah, is a variation of the parable of adulterous Jerusalem (ch 23; cf. ch 16). It differs in that the comparison drawn between Jerusalem, soon to be exiled, and Samaria, already in exile, is more explicit in the parable of Oholah and Oholibah. In chapter 16 Jerusalem was charged with greater sins than Sodom and Samaria, but was promised restoration. Only the adulterous nature of the two sisters and God’s judgment on them is emphasized in chapter 23, with no word of restoration. This parable is a fitting introduction to that of the boiling pot (ch 24), in which Jerusalem is compared to a rusty pot boiling with water. The Jerusalemites, likened to pieces of meat in the boiling pot, will die in the city. The parable was pronounced on the starting day of Nebuchadnezzar’s siege of Jerusalem. Thus, the exiles were divinely forewarned of God’s intent to destroy the temple (24:21) and were prepared for messengers bringing the bad news of Jerusalem’s fall.<\/p>\n<p>Those oracles and parables conclude the first division of the book. Ezekiel has stated God’s case against the rebellious house of Judah in many ways. His metaphors have likened Judah to a burnt piece of wood, to an uprooted vine, to a baby who grew up to be an adulteress, and to Oholibah, the adulterous woman. He has countered arguments against the fulfillment of God’s word and against the justice of God. He has reassured the exiles that God will not leave the righteous and that the future of Israel begins with a righteous remnant. The pendulum of Ezekiel’s writing has swung from judgment to restoration, while the clock was bringing Judah closer to the hour of its fall.<\/p>\n<h5>Oracles against the Nations (25:1–32:32)<\/h5>\n<p>Ammon, Moab, and Edom were Israel’s neighbors to the east. Because they were ethnically related to Israel, they were not attacked by the Israelites on their march to the Promised Land. Ammon and Moab were descendants of Lot, Abraham’s nephew, and the Edomites descended from Esau, the brother of Jacob. Although God forbade war with them, relations between Israel and its eastern neighbors were always tense. Israel had been overrun by the Ammonites for a time, and Israel was never successful in controlling the Edomites’ competitive trade relations. Those neighboring nations joined the Babylonian attack against Jerusalem and rejoiced when Jerusalem fell and the temple was devastated (Ez 25:3-12). They were ready to take over and loot Judah’s cities, and to instigate trouble in a time when Jerusalem was distressed. Therefore, says Ezekiel, God’s judgment will also extend to Ammon, Moab, and Edom (vv 4-14).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistines had been Israel’s enemy to the southwest. During the period of the judges and the united monarchy, the Philistines had controlled much of Israel’s territory. King David successfully limited the Philistine threat by confining them to their own territory. But in Ezekiel’s day they were still considered Israel’s “everlasting” enemy (25:15), possibly intensified by Philistine support of the Babylonian invasion of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>The city of Tyre had received reports of the overthrow of Jerusalem and was ready to exploit the opportunity for its own advantage (26:2). Tyre’s trade position was unrivaled; its ships crossed the seas to exchange goods with many distant lands (Ez 27). But Tyre would soon be broken by the Babylonians, its wealth dried up with the destruction of the fleet and the murder of its sailors (27:26).<\/p>\n<p>The prince of Tyre is singled out in chapter 28, but verse 12 refers to the “king” of Tyre. Interpreters disagree whether they are one person or two. Those who distinguish between the two understand the prince of Tyre to be the ruler of that city, but they consider the “king” of Tyre to represent Satan (28:13-15). The Garden of Eden with all its splendor is an appropriate setting for the original glory of an angelic Satan before his fall. But there is no reason within the context to distinguish between the prince and the king of Tyre. Each is said to have exalted himself, and both took authority over men as if they were gods and enjoyed all the splendor and royalty that belong to God. And both prince and king fall from their high position. The passage is a magnificent example of Ezekiel’s literary ability. He draws a glorious picture of the Garden of Eden, reworking the same theme as he depicts the glory and fall of the king of Tyre. Ezekiel presents him as a cherub, in accordance with the local belief that the king was divine. He wore the finest clothing, with nine kinds of precious stones (v 13). Though God had elevated him to the royal throne (vv 13-14), the king’s heart turned to materialism and to religious and judicial corruption (vv 16-18). In a sense the king (prince) represents the people of Tyre. They were all guilty of corruption, injustice, and violence. If God judged his covenant people for their perversion of justice and for their sins, his judgment would surely come also on the city of Tyre (vv 18-19). When the Babylonians marched on Tyre, they laboriously built a jetty from the mainland to the city. At the same time Tyrian ships loaded with goods and treasures sailed out across the Mediterranean, so that when Nebuchadnezzar’s troops finally breached the walls, little loot could be taken (29:18).<\/p>\n<p>The city of Sidon also cheered Jerusalem’s destruction. Sidon was a port city in Phoenicia, to the north of Tyre. By pestilence and war, the inhabitants of Sidon would learn the justice of Israel’s God.<\/p>\n<p>Six nations (Ammon, Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, and Sidon) scorned Israel at the fall of Jerusalem. Because God had invested his holiness in the temple of Jerusalem and in his people, the temple’s destruction and the people’s exile signified to the nations that Israel’s God was impotent. They did not realize that the reason for Israel’s fate was God’s intolerance of his people’s sin. God’s holiness required the punishment of sin, and it also required vindication for his name (28:22-23). God was still concerned for his people, that Israel might know he had removed the scorn of their neighbors (v 24). In the restoration of Israel the Lord would further manifest his holiness before the nations. Israel would receive back the land, vineyards, and houses, and would enjoy the bounty of the Lord in peace (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>Egypt had convinced the people of Israel and Judah that with its help the Assyrians and the Babylonians could not stand their ground in Palestine. In 722 <span>BC<\/span> the Assyrian troops took the northern capital of Samaria, and in 586 the Babylonians conquered Jerusalem, while Egypt remained passive. The Egyptians had desired control over Palestine for economic reasons, but not at the expense of their own welfare. Egypt, too, would lose its leadership under God’s judgment (29:9-16). Reduced to dependence on foreign powers, Egypt would no longer be a stumbling block for Israel. First, Babylonia was permitted to break Egypt’s power (23:1–32:21); later, the Persians, Greeks, and Romans would incorporate Egypt as a province. The fall of Egypt coincided with the fall of several great and small kingdoms: Assyria (32:22-23), Elam (vv 24-25), Meshech and Tubal (vv 26-28), Edom (v 29), and Sidon (v 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Proclamation of Hope (33:1–48:35)<\/h5>\n<p>After the visions of God’s judgment on the surrounding nations, Ezekiel returns to the future hope of Israel. In the first major section of his book he dealt with the reasons for Judah’s exile and the destruction of the temple, alluding often to the future of Israel. But the prophet’s organization of his material included, between prophecies of Israel’s judgment and restoration, the oracles of God’s judgment on Israel’s neighbors who had encouraged and rejoiced in its fall. Throughout its history Israel had allowed foreign nations to influence its religion, culture, and form of government. The reduction of their powers meant Israel, restored to the Promised Land, would be more free for faithfulness to God. Before taking up the theme of the restoration, Ezekiel reviews the emphases of chapters 1–24: (1) He was called to be a watchman over Israel (33:1-9; cf. 1:1–3:21). (2) Israel had sinned against the Lord and had to receive a righteous judgment (33:10). (3) Jerusalem was to be taken by the Babylonians (v 21). (4) Israel’s repentance is necessary for restoration (vv 11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Thus far, his ministry had not met with success. The exiles who had heard his messages were full of appreciation for Ezekiel’s rhetorical and literary abilities (33:32). They readily accepted Ezekiel as a watchman who warned the people of the impending catastrophe at Jerusalem, and they may have admitted that their sin was the reason for God’s judgment on Israel and Jerusalem. But they were slow in applying the prophetic word to their own lives. God was ready to forgive their sins if they repented, acknowledged him, and demonstrated their renewed spirit by practicing the law of God (v 32). Now that the news of Jerusalem had been reported to the exiles (v 21), the necessity for the people to act responsibly was even more urgent. The Lord had demonstrated that Ezekiel was a true prophet (v 33).<\/p>\n<p>The success of Ezekiel’s ministry was not measured in numbers. He faithfully declared the word of God in word, sign, and parable. The exiles had followed the false hopes proclaimed by false “shepherds” who had fattened themselves at the expense of the flock (34:2-3). They did not take care of those in need (v 4), and they allowed the flock to be scattered (vv 5-6). God promised his people that he would be the faithful shepherd, bring the sheep together, feed them, and care for them (34:11-15; cf. Ps 23). God would also distinguish between the sheep and the goats, to find out whose hearts were right with him, so that the true sheep could be restored to God’s flock (Ez 34:20-22). God’s promise included the restoration of the land and the restoration of the divinely appointed Davidic dynasty (v 24). The renewed fellowship between the Lord and Israel under the messianic ruler would be sealed with a new covenant, the “covenant of peace.” That covenant assured the people of God’s blessing on their labor, bringing them abundant harvests (vv 26-27). The people would not be forced to fight against nature in their pursuits (vv 25-28). They would not have to struggle against other peoples who might try to share in their blessings by force (vv 27-29). The prophetic vision telescoped the events of the restoration of Israel after the exile, the coming of Jesus the Messiah (cf. Jn 10), and the full restoration of the sin-cursed world.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 34 is the key to the messages of restoration. The emphases include the outworking of the frequently repeated verse “They will truly be my people, and I will be their God” (11:20; cf. 34:30; 36:28). The most significant aspects of the restoration theme include: (1) God’s gracious restoration of his people to covenant blessing (36:20-36; 37:23-26; 39:25); (2) God’s restoration of the nation of Israel to the land (36:1-15, 24; 37:14-23; 39:27); (3) God’s new covenant, giving his Spirit to his people (36:25-27; 37:14; 39:29), and his blessing on his people (36:8-12, 29-38; 39:9-10, 26), assuring them of victory over their enemies (35:1-15; 36:36; 37:28; 38:1–39:24); (4) God’s appointment of a Davidic king, the Messiah, over his people (37:24-25); and (5) God’s temple restored among his people (37:26-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The People of God<\/h6>\n<p>The rejection of the exiles did not last forever. Based on the Abrahamic covenant, the Lord promised to bless the faithful remnant and to make of them a new people. The imagery of a valley of dry bones is particularly fitting. The dry bones represent God’s people without hope (37:11). Ezekiel proclaims to them the good news that God will renew and restore them (v 12). The Lord’s purpose for his people is that all the nations may honor his holy name through his people (39:7, 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The Land<\/h6>\n<p>The promise also extends to the land, originally given to Abraham and his descendants. The Abrahamic covenant included a messianic element, for through the family of Abraham living in the Promised Land all nations would receive God’s blessing (Gn 12:3). In a vision Ezekiel saw the boundaries and described the division of the land (Ez 47–48). The royal city of Jerusalem is the central symbol of God’s presence among his people; its name will be “The Lord is there” (48:8-35).<\/p>\n<h6>The New Covenant<\/h6>\n<p>The Abrahamic covenant is renewed, a gracious covenant that expresses the restored relationship. “Covenant of peace” fittingly describes its nature and benefits. The restless people of God are promised rest from their searching, their enemies, and their toil. The change in relationship is further emphasized by God’s sending of his Spirit, who will add a new dimension to the lifestyle of his people. Obedience to God will no longer be constrained, for God’s Spirit helps his people to do his will. A new heart, controlled by the Spirit of God, is given to the Lord’s people (36:26-27). The presence of the Spirit also signifies a new life for the people (37:14; see Jn 3:8, 16; Acts 2:38; Rom 8:2-4, 15).<\/p>\n<h6>The Messiah<\/h6>\n<p>The OT hope of a messianic king is crystallized in Ezekiel’s message. His rule will be everlasting (Ez 37:25), over all God’s people who have new hearts (vv 15-25).<\/p>\n<h6>The Temple<\/h6>\n<p>As a priest, Ezekiel remained keenly interested in the temple, priesthood, sacrificial regulations, and festivals. A large section of the prophecy’s last division describes the temple’s revived worship (40:1–46:24). His vision of the glory of God, so important in the messages of God’s judgment on Jerusalem (chs 1, 10–11), now assures the remnant that God did not forsake his people (43:2-5). He will dwell among them, for the temple is a symbol of God’s presence (37:27). Some interpreters believe that the temple, with its ritual as described in Ezekiel 40–46, will be restored in the messianic era before the last judgment. Others believe the promises about the temple provide a positive symbolic answer to Ezekiel’s greatest concern: whether God will return to be with his people (48:35; see Jn 2:21; Rv 21:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are various interpretations of chapters 34–48. As a watchman to Israel, Ezekiel had a message for the exiled Jewish community. Thus the prophecy’s fulfillment must have begun with the decree of Cyrus I (538 <span>BC<\/span>) permitting the Jews to return to their land (Ezr 1:1-3). Two rival schools of interpretation exist on how the prophecy is fulfilled beyond Israel’s restoration to the land. Those who interpret Israel as simply the nation view the modern return of Jewish people to the land of Israel as a continuation of God’s prophetic promise. They believe that God’s plan for Israel is being fulfilled along with, and in addition to, his plan for the Christian church. The fulfillment of those prophecies will be inaugurated by the coming of the messianic king, who will give earthly peace to the Jewish people. The temple worship (Ez 40–48) will be restored in some way during the period of the messianic kingdom. The church will enjoy a small share in all the events centered on the Jews. The promises of Ezekiel’s vision are thus limited to the nation of Israel and must be fulfilled before the coming of a new heaven and earth.<\/p>\n<p>Other interpreters believe that Ezekiel wrote for the benefit of spiritual descendants of Abraham who believe, as Abraham did, in God’s promises (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:11-13; Gal 3:6-9, 29). All who have faith like Abraham, whether Jews or Gentiles, are regarded as Abraham’s offspring (Gal 3:28-29). Ezekiel’s message thus would include all of God’s gracious work among Christian Gentiles, who have become the recipients of God’s promises and benefits. It is possible, on the basis of 1 Peter 1:10-11, to interpret Ezekiel’s language as a prophetic expression of how God’s grace would come to all those who become reconciled to God through faith in the gospel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Ezekiel (Person); Prophecy.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EZEKIEL, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the temple to his fellow exiles. Settled at Tel-abib, on the canal of Kebar, the thousands of deportees eked out a meager existence. They hoped for a speedy return to Judah and a change for the better in the international situation. Their hope was enflamed by the spirited preaching of false prophets, likened to jackals among the ruins (13:4). They piously said, “The Lord declares . . . ,” but they were actually self-commissioned (v 6). They deceived the people with a message of peace at a time when God’s judgment was about to be poured out on his people (v 10). They had led the people to distrust prophecy to such an extent that a proverb circulated among the people that “the days grow long, and every vision comes to nought” (12:22). Much time had passed since visions of God’s judgment had been given to the people, and nothing could be interpreted as a fulfillment of those visions. Ezekiel was called to serve his community by symbolic acts, visions, and verbal messages in order to convince the people that God’s judgment was imminent (v 23).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandBackground\">Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of the prophet Ezekiel can be understood best against the backdrop of his time. If, as the church father Origen believed, the vague reference “in the thirtieth year” (1:1) marks the prophet’s age at the time of his first vision, Ezekiel was born during the rule of King Josiah of Judah (c. 640–609 <span>BC<\/span>). Josiah was the grandson of King Manasseh, whose sacrilegious acts had brought God’s judgment on the kingdom of Judah (2 Kgs 21:10-15).<\/p>\n<p>Though Judah’s political situation was perilous, Josiah led the nation in a radical reformation that began with the finding of the “Book of the Law” (2 Kgs 22) in the year that Ezekiel was born (c. 621 <span>BC<\/span>). Idolatry was done away with and the people turned back to God, but God’s judgment on Judah was unchangeable (23:26-27). Josiah erred in trying to make Judah a kingdom with which other states had to reckon. He was threatened when the Egyptian pharaoh Neco passed through Judah on his way to aid the weakened Assyrian kingdom. Josiah marched to meet the Egyptian forces, but his troops were unable to stand against the Egyptians, and he died in battle (v 29). Egypt took control of Judah, and Pharaoh Neco placed Jehoiakim in power over Jerusalem. Egyptian control did not last long, however, for in 605 <span>BC<\/span> Egypt and Assyria were defeated by Babylonia’s king Nebuchadnezzar at Carchemish. The Babylonians then pushed south to Jerusalem, and the first deportation of Judean leaders (among them the prophet Daniel) took place.<\/p>\n<p>Jehoiakim was permitted to continue ruling over Judah as a vassal king of Nebuchadnezzar. But his dealings with Egypt brought the emperor’s wrath down upon him. Before the Babylonians could address the Judean situation, Jehoiakim died and his son Jehoiachin was crowned. When the Babylonian forces arrived at the gates of Jerusalem, Jehoiachin and thousands of the aristocracy were taken to Babylon (2 Kgs 24:10-17). Among those deportees was Ezekiel, then about 25 years old.<\/p>\n<p>Although the book says otherwise, many scholars think that Ezekiel lived and taught in Judah for the duration of the siege and the fall of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>). They conclude this from Ezekiel’s familiarity with idolatry in the temple and his vivid descriptions of Jerusalem’s last days (Ez 8:11). Others believe that Ezekiel ministered both to the exiled community and to the Judeans living in Judah. Neither interpretation does full justice to the claims of the book itself. Ezekiel was exiled in 597 <span>BC<\/span>. He was called to bring God’s word to the deportees at Tel-abib; he was granted a vision of the horrible practices in the temple court; and he was familiar with Jerusalem and Judah from having lived there and from reports on affairs in Jerusalem coming to the exiles through messengers. Jeremiah, Ezekiel’s contemporary, was prophesying in Jerusalem, but there is no evidence that Jeremiah and Ezekiel knew of each other’s ministry. If Ezekiel had brought God’s word to Jerusalem during the siege, some reference to Jeremiah might appear in his writings. If Jeremiah was supported by Ezekiel’s ministry in Jerusalem, he probably would have included a positive word for his colleague in his book. The book of Ezekiel plainly says that Ezekiel lived and preached in exile (see 1:1-3; 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The prophecy of Ezekiel is easily outlined by subject matter and chronology. The chronology of the period permits a division before and after 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Jerusalem). Chapters 1–24 cover the pre-586 ministry of Ezekiel, whereas chapters 33–48 represent his post-586 ministry. Chapters 25–32 (oracles against the foreign nations) function as a transition between the book’s two major divisions.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s outline according to subject matter divides into four parts: Ezekiel’s call (1:1–3:21); prophecies of judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27); oracles against the nations (25:1–32:32); and proclamation of hope (33:1–48:35).<\/p>\n<h5>Ezekiel’s Call (1:1–3:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The prophet’s call in one sense was similar to that of Isaiah and Jeremiah. Isaiah received his mission in a vision of God’s glory in the temple (Is 6). Jeremiah was called unexpectedly in his youth, and received signs that solemnly set forth the nature of his mission (Jer 1:11-15). The call of Ezekiel combined those two elements. Revelation of God’s glory to the prophet at the same time revealed the nature of the prophet’s mission. Ezekiel’s call contained a full description of God’s glory. Isaiah briefly stated that he saw the Lord enthroned in the temple, and he concentrated on the seraphim representing and magnifying God’s glory. Ezekiel elaborated on the revelation of the Lord’s glory as well as on the ministering angels who went before the Lord as part of his royal entourage. The vision of God’s glory, though difficult to understand, is the key to the book of Ezekiel.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel, as a priest, was concerned about the future of the temple. That sacred place had been ordained by God as his home among his people. The glory, presence, and holiness of God were symbolized in the temple (see 1 Kgs 8:10-11). In exile Ezekiel could not serve his people as a priest, for they were far from Jerusalem, the city God had chosen. Against all expectations the Lord revealed himself to Ezekiel in the land of Babylon. In calling Ezekiel to a prophetic ministry, God assured his servant that he had not forsaken his people, even though they had been banished from the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet’s vision began with a storm. As a large cloud approached from the north, Ezekiel saw a brightness surrounding the cloud, four creatures, and four wheels. The combination of creatures and wheels suggests that the Lord appeared in a chariot. God’s chariot is a familiar OT representation of his coming in judgment (see Is 66:15-16). The wheels within wheels and the position of the four living creatures may signify God’s total control over the whole earth, so he could move his “chariot of judgment” in any direction. It is also possible that the living creatures with their four faces, and the wheels full of eyes, may be separate symbols showing that God sees all that happens and thereby knows the plight of the exiles. In the vision the prophet’s attention was drawn to a throne above the heads of the creatures. On the throne was “the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1:28). In his vision of God’s coming in judgment, Ezekiel received his call to the prophetic ministry: “Son of man, I send you to the people of Israel, to a nation of rebels who have rebelled against me” (2:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). During a dark hour of Israel’s history, Ezekiel had to prophesy, rebuke his fellow exiles (3:11), and be responsible as a watchman over the house of Israel (3:17; cf. 33:1-9). Symbolic of his mission was a scroll filled with lamentations and woe (2:9-10), which when eaten became sweet as honey (3:1-3). Difficult as the mission was, God’s presence and the certain fulfillment of the prophecies sweetened Ezekiel’s task. Such encouragement was intended to take away any fear of the rebellious Israelites (2:6-7). Instead of being elated with his mission, however, Ezekiel became despondent.<\/p>\n<p>A week later, the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel to remind him of his important role as a watchman (3:16-17). Ezekiel became responsible for Israel as a nation, not just for individuals. His witness to Israel had the express aim of national repentance (vv 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was confined to his house by God (3:24-25). The house ministry was to be carried on only with those Israelites who sought God’s will, for the Lord had abandoned those who continued in their apostasy. The prophetic word would not help the apostates (v 26). The principle of Ezekiel’s ministry is found in 3:27: “Whenever I give you a message, I will loosen your tongue and let you speak. Then you will say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span> says!’ Some of them will listen, but some will ignore you, for they are rebels” (<span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Mt 11:15; 13:43).<\/p>\n<h5>Prophecies of Judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Symbolism figures prominently in Ezekiel’s writing. His priestly background and preparation probably suited him to receive and communicate God’s word in symbolic acts and speech. Chapters 4 and 5 contain four symbolic acts: (1) Jerusalem’s siege is portrayed on a brick (Ez 4:1-3); (2) Israel’s iniquity is represented by Ezekiel’s lying on his sides (vv 4-8); (3) Jerusalem’s grief and horror in the last days of the siege are represented by Ezekiel’s food and drink (vv 9-17); (4) Jerusalem’s fate is represented by the prophet’s hair being cut off (5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s instructions were further illuminated by God’s explanation of Israel’s apostasy (5:6-7) and his judgment on Israel (vv 8-12). The judgment will last until the Israelites admit that in covenant faithfulness their Lord has inflicted righteous judgment on them (v 13).<\/p>\n<p>God would direct his judgment first against the people and the city of Jerusalem. Next in line were the mountains of Israel (ch 6) and the land (ch 7). God’s wrath included the cities and cultic sites in the hill country of Judah, leaving no protection for the people (6:3-6). Abominations that were practiced throughout the land caused God’s judgment to fall on the land as well as on the people (7:2-3, 10-11, 23). But because God is righteous, he judged the people according to their ways of life, desiring that they would once more acknowledge him as their God (7:27).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet then (chs 8–11) focused on the abominations practiced in Jerusalem, particularly idolatry in the temple courts, which caused the judgment announced in chapters 1–7. An idol had been erected in the inner court (8:3-5). By the wall of the court, elders of the city were paying homage to the idols that surrounded the court (vv 11-12). Closer to the temple, women were weeping for the god Tammuz (v 14), and men were worshiping the sun (v 16). In preparation for the ultimate judgment on the land, the prophet placed a mark on the foreheads of the few faithful Israelites so that they would survive (9:4-6). Then (ch 10), the glory of God, which had filled the temple from the time of Solomon, gradually left: “Then the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> went up from the city and stopped above the mountain to the east” (11:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people, now without divine protection, were being handed over to the Babylonians (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>The message of doom for Jerusalem contains four elements of hope: restoration of the people (11:17), restoration of the land (v 17), purification of the people (v 18), and renewed fellowship between God and his people (vv 19-20). The prophet develops those four themes in chapters 33–48.<\/p>\n<p>The visions of chapters 10 and 11 made clear that when God removed his presence from Jerusalem, the exile was approaching. Those who were already in Babylon were unwilling to believe that such an extensive devastation of Jerusalem would happen or that the people would all be exiled and the land become desolate.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel acted out the certainty of God’s word of judgment by packing his bags and showing the baggage to his fellow exiles. First, he placed the bags in the courtyard outside his modest home. Next, he went out by making a hole through the wall. Finally, the prophet walked about the settlement with his bags in full view. Skeptical observers did not understand Ezekiel and probably thought he was crazy. The believers who saw him understood. His strange actions dramatized how the king’s aides would do all they could to help King Zedekiah escape just before the fall of Jerusalem. Second Kings 25 tells how the king and his soldiers left Jerusalem for the wilderness, to be overtaken by the Babylonians at Jericho and brought before Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah. As a captive, Zedekiah witnessed the murder of his sons; then his eyes were put out, and he was sent into exile with the other Judeans (cf. Ez 12:13). The prophet’s explanation concluded with a word of comfort. Because of his covenant with Abraham, God promised not to destroy the people completely. A remnant who overcame the sword, famine, and pestilence would live to tell the story of God’s judgment (vv 15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel further illustrated the nation’s plight by eating as though full of fear, depicting the great trauma that all of Judah’s inhabitants would soon undergo.<\/p>\n<p>Both symbolic acts, packing his belongings and eating, emphasized the truthfulness of God’s word. The people needed to face the nature of their God: He is magnificent, and when he speaks, his words are powerful and come to pass. Thus, the devastation of the land and the people’s exile were a fulfillment of God’s word through the prophets. The judgment was meant to produce a recognition of the Lord, repentance, and a return to God. Some in Judah doubted the efficacy of God’s prophecies, saying, “Time passes, making a liar of every prophet” (12:22). Others thought God’s word would come true in the distant future (v 27). The prevailing attitude of distrust in God’s word had been stimulated by the popular preaching of false prophets (ch 13). Never commissioned by the Lord, they deceived God’s people by lying and misdirecting them with messages of peace (vv 8-10). Wickedness, lying, and deceit were encouraged among the people by such false prophets (v 22). The magnitude of their sin and their great responsibility for Judah’s fall would be matched by the Lord’s heavy judgment. Yet God would save his people from such evil and will prepare a righteous nation with whom to maintain his covenant (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>The certainty of the judgment has been connected with the truthfulness of God’s word. Ezekiel’s difficult task of affirming the doom of Jerusalem to stubborn hearers was intensified by the people’s idolatry. Their whole way of life denied the existence of God. They practiced idolatry in their worship, and they had set up idols in their hearts (14:3). Before the covenant with God could be restored, they had to be purified from their idolatry. Even so, repentance would not guarantee immunity from judgment. Sword, famine, wild beasts, and plagues would ravage the population (v 21). After the execution of his judgment, God would take back those survivors who had turned to him for mercy. God would surely accomplish all that he intended for his people’s good (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>In chapters 15–17 Ezekiel uses three parables to set forth the apostasy, present uselessness, and judgment of Israel. Jerusalem and Judah are compared to a piece of charred wood, an adulterous woman, and a vine.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 15 reviews Jerusalem’s case. Jerusalem is compared to a piece of wood, both ends of which have been charred with fire, so that the wood is of no value. As the whole piece of wood is burned instead of being saved, so Jerusalem would undergo complete devastation (15:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 16 presents God’s case against Jerusalem from a different perspective, stressing his care for Jerusalem in the past. The beginnings of her history are compared to the birth of a female child, left abandoned by her mother (16:3-5). God adopted the child and washed and clothed her (vv 6-7). He made a covenant with her (v 8), making her his own possession. He generously gave her all the fine things of life (vv 9-13). In the height of her development, Jerusalem’s fame spread to the nations (v 14). Her self-reliance made her a spiritual prostitute as she took up the religious practices and way of life of the nations (vv 15-34). The cities of Sodom (Gn 19) and Samaria (2 Kgs 17:6), known for their immorality, are called Jerusalem’s sisters (Ez 16:46). They had been judged by God, but the corruption of those cities was little compared to the lewdness of Jerusalem (vv 48-51). Thus, Jerusalem also would surely fall and become desolate. Yet Ezekiel anticipates the judgment’s final outcome; Jerusalem will be restored to covenantal blessing (vv 62-63) after her repentance.<\/p>\n<p>The third parable (ch 17) focuses on God’s sovereignty over political developments. Assyria was no longer a power to be reckoned with. Babylon and Egypt both exercised dominion, although the balance of power was veering in favor of Babylon. Their extension of power is likened to an eagle. Nebuchadnezzar, pictured as “a great eagle with broad wings full of many-colored feathers,” took control over the affairs of Judah by removing Jehoiachin, “the highest branch of a cedar tree,” from office and by exiling him with young leaders of the Judean state (17:3-4). Ezekiel was among them. Nebuchadnezzar let the Judeans control their own affairs under Zedekiah but expected them to be subject to Babylon and not to any other power. But Judah (likened to a vine) tried to ally itself with Pharaoh Hophra of Egypt, “another great eagle with broad wings and full plumage” (v 7), against Nebuchadnezzar. Zedekiah’s folly in turning to Egypt would cause Nebuchadnezzar to pull up the vine by its roots and make it wither (vv 9-10). In explaining the parable, God told the exiles that Judah’s fall was a result of its unfaithfulness to King Nebuchadnezzar, to whom Judah owed allegiance by covenant (vv 13-18). Judah’s unfaithfulness thus extended to all of its relationships: religious, cultural, and political. After the exile, God promised, he would restore his people to their land under a Messiah, “a tender shoot” (v 22). The messianic rule is signified by the young twig, which when planted in the land will become a magnificent cedar, giving shade and protection to the birds. Chapter 17 is an inspiring affirmation of the sovereignty of God in human affairs (“All the trees will know that it is I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, who cuts down the tall tree and helps the short tree to grow tall. It is I who makes the green tree wither and gives new life to the dead tree”—17:24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 18–22 contain Ezekiel’s oracles to Judah, its leaders, and the exiles. First, he enunciates God’s standard of righteousness: “The person who sins will be the one who dies” (18:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people are charging God with injustice, for they believe themselves to be under God’s judgment for the sins of their ancestors (vv 25-29). Although the Ten Commandments do say that God may punish “the sins of their parents to the third and the fourth generations” (Ex 20:5, <span>nlt<\/span>), the prophet vindicates God’s justice, telling the people that they are not being punished merely for their ancestors’ sin. Each person must be directly accountable to God; the sinner will die in wickedness, and the righteous will live by righteousness. A life of faithfulness to God’s moral and civil law will be rewarded (Ez 18:5-9). Even if one’s father was a sinner, the father’s sin is not transferable (vv 14-18). God is ready to forgive any sinner who repents (v 27). The prophet’s vindication of God’s justice becomes a call to repentance. The sinners in Judah and in exile were thus warned of the consequences of their evil, and were exhorted to return to their God and his standard of right and wrong (vv 31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 19 contains two parables in the form of a lamentation. The first portrays a lioness and her two cubs. The lioness is Hamutal, the wife of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:31), who bore two sons: Jehoahaz and Zedekiah. Jehoahaz is referred to in Ezekiel 19:3-4 as a cub who grew up and was taken to Egypt (by Pharaoh Neco in 608 <span>BC<\/span>; see 2 Kgs 23:31-34). Zedekiah succeeded to the throne ten years later. In the lamentation the prophet imaginatively represents Zedekiah as a young cub who is ultimately taken to Babylon as a rebellious ruler (Ez 19:7-9). The second parable changes the imagery to a vine, representing Israel (v 10). In its early days God blessed Israel with strong rulers, but now the vine was wilting as Zedekiah irresponsibly led Judah to its last days. Ezekiel’s lamentation stresses the lack of a good candidate for the throne and the lack of life in the vine (vv 13-14).<\/p>\n<p>In chapter 20 the prophet concludes God’s argument against his people. He reviews the history of Israel’s past, starting with God’s self-revelation in Egypt (20:5-6). He took to himself a stubborn nation, tied to idolatry (v 8) and prone to apostasy (vv 13, 21). Israel wanted to be one of the great nations (v 32) instead of a sanctified people (v 12). As a result of its spiritual hardness, Israel is dispersed to live among the nations (v 35). Yet God had a solemn covenant with Israel, made by oath to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. On the basis of that covenant, God will reach out with compassion to those who repent of their sinful ways (vv 37-44). In Israel’s judgment and restoration the nations will see the holiness of God, which does not tolerate unfaithfulness in Israel (v 41).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s prophecies alternate between God’s judgment on Israel’s sin and his restoration of Israel, spanning the bridge between Israel’s past and future. In view of the people’s doubts of the coming judgment on Jerusalem, he stresses the necessity of judgment and the need for repentance. Still, the future restoration of a remnant is touched upon here and there as the counterpart of his message of judgment. After announcing the fall of Jerusalem, the prophet shifts from a message of judgment to one of hope.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet returns to the proclamation of judgment in four oracles (20:45–21:32). He speaks against the Negev Desert area (20:45-49), Jerusalem and the land of Israel (21:2-17, 20-27), and against the Ammonites (vv 28-32). God permitted the sword of Nebuchadnezzar to be his instrument of judgment upon the Judeans (v 19). He would see to the judgment on the Ammonites. The Judeans would recover their previous glory, but the memory of the Ammonites would perish (vv 27, 32). The oracle against the Ammonites anticipates a larger treatise on Israel’s other neighbors: Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, Sidon, and Egypt (chs 25–29).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 22–24 contain a renewed series of indictments against Jerusalem. Jerusalem’s religious and civil leadership (the prophets, priests, and princes) are corrupt, and the people have followed their example (22:25-30). The parable of the two sisters, Oholah and Oholibah, is a variation of the parable of adulterous Jerusalem (ch 23; cf. ch 16). It differs in that the comparison drawn between Jerusalem, soon to be exiled, and Samaria, already in exile, is more explicit in the parable of Oholah and Oholibah. In chapter 16 Jerusalem was charged with greater sins than Sodom and Samaria, but was promised restoration. Only the adulterous nature of the two sisters and God’s judgment on them is emphasized in chapter 23, with no word of restoration. This parable is a fitting introduction to that of the boiling pot (ch 24), in which Jerusalem is compared to a rusty pot boiling with water. The Jerusalemites, likened to pieces of meat in the boiling pot, will die in the city. The parable was pronounced on the starting day of Nebuchadnezzar’s siege of Jerusalem. Thus, the exiles were divinely forewarned of God’s intent to destroy the temple (24:21) and were prepared for messengers bringing the bad news of Jerusalem’s fall.<\/p>\n<p>Those oracles and parables conclude the first division of the book. Ezekiel has stated God’s case against the rebellious house of Judah in many ways. His metaphors have likened Judah to a burnt piece of wood, to an uprooted vine, to a baby who grew up to be an adulteress, and to Oholibah, the adulterous woman. He has countered arguments against the fulfillment of God’s word and against the justice of God. He has reassured the exiles that God will not leave the righteous and that the future of Israel begins with a righteous remnant. The pendulum of Ezekiel’s writing has swung from judgment to restoration, while the clock was bringing Judah closer to the hour of its fall.<\/p>\n<h5>Oracles against the Nations (25:1–32:32)<\/h5>\n<p>Ammon, Moab, and Edom were Israel’s neighbors to the east. Because they were ethnically related to Israel, they were not attacked by the Israelites on their march to the Promised Land. Ammon and Moab were descendants of Lot, Abraham’s nephew, and the Edomites descended from Esau, the brother of Jacob. Although God forbade war with them, relations between Israel and its eastern neighbors were always tense. Israel had been overrun by the Ammonites for a time, and Israel was never successful in controlling the Edomites’ competitive trade relations. Those neighboring nations joined the Babylonian attack against Jerusalem and rejoiced when Jerusalem fell and the temple was devastated (Ez 25:3-12). They were ready to take over and loot Judah’s cities, and to instigate trouble in a time when Jerusalem was distressed. Therefore, says Ezekiel, God’s judgment will also extend to Ammon, Moab, and Edom (vv 4-14).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistines had been Israel’s enemy to the southwest. During the period of the judges and the united monarchy, the Philistines had controlled much of Israel’s territory. King David successfully limited the Philistine threat by confining them to their own territory. But in Ezekiel’s day they were still considered Israel’s “everlasting” enemy (25:15), possibly intensified by Philistine support of the Babylonian invasion of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>The city of Tyre had received reports of the overthrow of Jerusalem and was ready to exploit the opportunity for its own advantage (26:2). Tyre’s trade position was unrivaled; its ships crossed the seas to exchange goods with many distant lands (Ez 27). But Tyre would soon be broken by the Babylonians, its wealth dried up with the destruction of the fleet and the murder of its sailors (27:26).<\/p>\n<p>The prince of Tyre is singled out in chapter 28, but verse 12 refers to the “king” of Tyre. Interpreters disagree whether they are one person or two. Those who distinguish between the two understand the prince of Tyre to be the ruler of that city, but they consider the “king” of Tyre to represent Satan (28:13-15). The Garden of Eden with all its splendor is an appropriate setting for the original glory of an angelic Satan before his fall. But there is no reason within the context to distinguish between the prince and the king of Tyre. Each is said to have exalted himself, and both took authority over men as if they were gods and enjoyed all the splendor and royalty that belong to God. And both prince and king fall from their high position. The passage is a magnificent example of Ezekiel’s literary ability. He draws a glorious picture of the Garden of Eden, reworking the same theme as he depicts the glory and fall of the king of Tyre. Ezekiel presents him as a cherub, in accordance with the local belief that the king was divine. He wore the finest clothing, with nine kinds of precious stones (v 13). Though God had elevated him to the royal throne (vv 13-14), the king’s heart turned to materialism and to religious and judicial corruption (vv 16-18). In a sense the king (prince) represents the people of Tyre. They were all guilty of corruption, injustice, and violence. If God judged his covenant people for their perversion of justice and for their sins, his judgment would surely come also on the city of Tyre (vv 18-19). When the Babylonians marched on Tyre, they laboriously built a jetty from the mainland to the city. At the same time Tyrian ships loaded with goods and treasures sailed out across the Mediterranean, so that when Nebuchadnezzar’s troops finally breached the walls, little loot could be taken (29:18).<\/p>\n<p>The city of Sidon also cheered Jerusalem’s destruction. Sidon was a port city in Phoenicia, to the north of Tyre. By pestilence and war, the inhabitants of Sidon would learn the justice of Israel’s God.<\/p>\n<p>Six nations (Ammon, Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, and Sidon) scorned Israel at the fall of Jerusalem. Because God had invested his holiness in the temple of Jerusalem and in his people, the temple’s destruction and the people’s exile signified to the nations that Israel’s God was impotent. They did not realize that the reason for Israel’s fate was God’s intolerance of his people’s sin. God’s holiness required the punishment of sin, and it also required vindication for his name (28:22-23). God was still concerned for his people, that Israel might know he had removed the scorn of their neighbors (v 24). In the restoration of Israel the Lord would further manifest his holiness before the nations. Israel would receive back the land, vineyards, and houses, and would enjoy the bounty of the Lord in peace (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>Egypt had convinced the people of Israel and Judah that with its help the Assyrians and the Babylonians could not stand their ground in Palestine. In 722 <span>BC<\/span> the Assyrian troops took the northern capital of Samaria, and in 586 the Babylonians conquered Jerusalem, while Egypt remained passive. The Egyptians had desired control over Palestine for economic reasons, but not at the expense of their own welfare. Egypt, too, would lose its leadership under God’s judgment (29:9-16). Reduced to dependence on foreign powers, Egypt would no longer be a stumbling block for Israel. First, Babylonia was permitted to break Egypt’s power (23:1–32:21); later, the Persians, Greeks, and Romans would incorporate Egypt as a province. The fall of Egypt coincided with the fall of several great and small kingdoms: Assyria (32:22-23), Elam (vv 24-25), Meshech and Tubal (vv 26-28), Edom (v 29), and Sidon (v 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Proclamation of Hope (33:1–48:35)<\/h5>\n<p>After the visions of God’s judgment on the surrounding nations, Ezekiel returns to the future hope of Israel. In the first major section of his book he dealt with the reasons for Judah’s exile and the destruction of the temple, alluding often to the future of Israel. But the prophet’s organization of his material included, between prophecies of Israel’s judgment and restoration, the oracles of God’s judgment on Israel’s neighbors who had encouraged and rejoiced in its fall. Throughout its history Israel had allowed foreign nations to influence its religion, culture, and form of government. The reduction of their powers meant Israel, restored to the Promised Land, would be more free for faithfulness to God. Before taking up the theme of the restoration, Ezekiel reviews the emphases of chapters 1–24: (1) He was called to be a watchman over Israel (33:1-9; cf. 1:1–3:21). (2) Israel had sinned against the Lord and had to receive a righteous judgment (33:10). (3) Jerusalem was to be taken by the Babylonians (v 21). (4) Israel’s repentance is necessary for restoration (vv 11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Thus far, his ministry had not met with success. The exiles who had heard his messages were full of appreciation for Ezekiel’s rhetorical and literary abilities (33:32). They readily accepted Ezekiel as a watchman who warned the people of the impending catastrophe at Jerusalem, and they may have admitted that their sin was the reason for God’s judgment on Israel and Jerusalem. But they were slow in applying the prophetic word to their own lives. God was ready to forgive their sins if they repented, acknowledged him, and demonstrated their renewed spirit by practicing the law of God (v 32). Now that the news of Jerusalem had been reported to the exiles (v 21), the necessity for the people to act responsibly was even more urgent. The Lord had demonstrated that Ezekiel was a true prophet (v 33).<\/p>\n<p>The success of Ezekiel’s ministry was not measured in numbers. He faithfully declared the word of God in word, sign, and parable. The exiles had followed the false hopes proclaimed by false “shepherds” who had fattened themselves at the expense of the flock (34:2-3). They did not take care of those in need (v 4), and they allowed the flock to be scattered (vv 5-6). God promised his people that he would be the faithful shepherd, bring the sheep together, feed them, and care for them (34:11-15; cf. Ps 23). God would also distinguish between the sheep and the goats, to find out whose hearts were right with him, so that the true sheep could be restored to God’s flock (Ez 34:20-22). God’s promise included the restoration of the land and the restoration of the divinely appointed Davidic dynasty (v 24). The renewed fellowship between the Lord and Israel under the messianic ruler would be sealed with a new covenant, the “covenant of peace.” That covenant assured the people of God’s blessing on their labor, bringing them abundant harvests (vv 26-27). The people would not be forced to fight against nature in their pursuits (vv 25-28). They would not have to struggle against other peoples who might try to share in their blessings by force (vv 27-29). The prophetic vision telescoped the events of the restoration of Israel after the exile, the coming of Jesus the Messiah (cf. Jn 10), and the full restoration of the sin-cursed world.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 34 is the key to the messages of restoration. The emphases include the outworking of the frequently repeated verse “They will truly be my people, and I will be their God” (11:20; cf. 34:30; 36:28). The most significant aspects of the restoration theme include: (1) God’s gracious restoration of his people to covenant blessing (36:20-36; 37:23-26; 39:25); (2) God’s restoration of the nation of Israel to the land (36:1-15, 24; 37:14-23; 39:27); (3) God’s new covenant, giving his Spirit to his people (36:25-27; 37:14; 39:29), and his blessing on his people (36:8-12, 29-38; 39:9-10, 26), assuring them of victory over their enemies (35:1-15; 36:36; 37:28; 38:1–39:24); (4) God’s appointment of a Davidic king, the Messiah, over his people (37:24-25); and (5) God’s temple restored among his people (37:26-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The People of God<\/h6>\n<p>The rejection of the exiles did not last forever. Based on the Abrahamic covenant, the Lord promised to bless the faithful remnant and to make of them a new people. The imagery of a valley of dry bones is particularly fitting. The dry bones represent God’s people without hope (37:11). Ezekiel proclaims to them the good news that God will renew and restore them (v 12). The Lord’s purpose for his people is that all the nations may honor his holy name through his people (39:7, 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The Land<\/h6>\n<p>The promise also extends to the land, originally given to Abraham and his descendants. The Abrahamic covenant included a messianic element, for through the family of Abraham living in the Promised Land all nations would receive God’s blessing (Gn 12:3). In a vision Ezekiel saw the boundaries and described the division of the land (Ez 47–48). The royal city of Jerusalem is the central symbol of God’s presence among his people; its name will be “The Lord is there” (48:8-35).<\/p>\n<h6>The New Covenant<\/h6>\n<p>The Abrahamic covenant is renewed, a gracious covenant that expresses the restored relationship. “Covenant of peace” fittingly describes its nature and benefits. The restless people of God are promised rest from their searching, their enemies, and their toil. The change in relationship is further emphasized by God’s sending of his Spirit, who will add a new dimension to the lifestyle of his people. Obedience to God will no longer be constrained, for God’s Spirit helps his people to do his will. A new heart, controlled by the Spirit of God, is given to the Lord’s people (36:26-27). The presence of the Spirit also signifies a new life for the people (37:14; see Jn 3:8, 16; Acts 2:38; Rom 8:2-4, 15).<\/p>\n<h6>The Messiah<\/h6>\n<p>The OT hope of a messianic king is crystallized in Ezekiel’s message. His rule will be everlasting (Ez 37:25), over all God’s people who have new hearts (vv 15-25).<\/p>\n<h6>The Temple<\/h6>\n<p>As a priest, Ezekiel remained keenly interested in the temple, priesthood, sacrificial regulations, and festivals. A large section of the prophecy’s last division describes the temple’s revived worship (40:1–46:24). His vision of the glory of God, so important in the messages of God’s judgment on Jerusalem (chs 1, 10–11), now assures the remnant that God did not forsake his people (43:2-5). He will dwell among them, for the temple is a symbol of God’s presence (37:27). Some interpreters believe that the temple, with its ritual as described in Ezekiel 40–46, will be restored in the messianic era before the last judgment. Others believe the promises about the temple provide a positive symbolic answer to Ezekiel’s greatest concern: whether God will return to be with his people (48:35; see Jn 2:21; Rv 21:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are various interpretations of chapters 34–48. As a watchman to Israel, Ezekiel had a message for the exiled Jewish community. Thus the prophecy’s fulfillment must have begun with the decree of Cyrus I (538 <span>BC<\/span>) permitting the Jews to return to their land (Ezr 1:1-3). Two rival schools of interpretation exist on how the prophecy is fulfilled beyond Israel’s restoration to the land. Those who interpret Israel as simply the nation view the modern return of Jewish people to the land of Israel as a continuation of God’s prophetic promise. They believe that God’s plan for Israel is being fulfilled along with, and in addition to, his plan for the Christian church. The fulfillment of those prophecies will be inaugurated by the coming of the messianic king, who will give earthly peace to the Jewish people. The temple worship (Ez 40–48) will be restored in some way during the period of the messianic kingdom. The church will enjoy a small share in all the events centered on the Jews. The promises of Ezekiel’s vision are thus limited to the nation of Israel and must be fulfilled before the coming of a new heaven and earth.<\/p>\n<p>Other interpreters believe that Ezekiel wrote for the benefit of spiritual descendants of Abraham who believe, as Abraham did, in God’s promises (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:11-13; Gal 3:6-9, 29). All who have faith like Abraham, whether Jews or Gentiles, are regarded as Abraham’s offspring (Gal 3:28-29). Ezekiel’s message thus would include all of God’s gracious work among Christian Gentiles, who have become the recipients of God’s promises and benefits. It is possible, on the basis of 1 Peter 1:10-11, to interpret Ezekiel’s language as a prophetic expression of how God’s grace would come to all those who become reconciled to God through faith in the gospel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Ezekiel (Person); Prophecy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EZEKIEL, Book of Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile. Preview • Author • Date and Background • Content Author Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the ...","summary_en":"EZEKIEL, Book of Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile. Preview • Author • Date and Background • Content Author Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43841,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:5","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:5-6<\/strong> <em>jealous God:<\/em> God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • <em>in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations:<\/em> It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending the effects of obedience to <em>a thousand generations<\/em> (see also 34:6-7; Deut 7:9). • <em>reject<\/em> (literally <em>hate<\/em>): The Hebrew words commonly translated “love” (Exod 20:6) and “hate” are difficult to translate into English because they include an act of the will as well as the emotional element we are familiar with. In biblical thinking, to “love” is to choose something and to act consistently in accord with that choice. To “hate” is to reject something and to act in ways consistent with that choice. The choice is connected to emotion: Feeling expresses itself in choices, and our choices show how we really feel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:5-6<\/strong> <em>jealous God:<\/em> God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • <em>in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations:<\/em> It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending the effects of obedience to <em>a thousand generations<\/em> (see also 34:6-7; Deut 7:9). • <em>reject<\/em> (literally <em>hate<\/em>): The Hebrew words commonly translated “love” (Exod 20:6) and “hate” are difficult to translate into English because they include an act of the will as well as the emotional element we are familiar with. In biblical thinking, to “love” is to choose something and to act consistently in accord with that choice. To “hate” is to reject something and to act in ways consistent with that choice. The choice is connected to emotion: Feeling expresses itself in choices, and our choices show how we really feel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:5-6 jealous God: God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations: It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending...","summary_en":"20:5-6 jealous God: God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations: It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71467,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:5","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:5-6<\/strong> <em>jealous God:<\/em> God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • <em>in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations:<\/em> It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending the effects of obedience to <em>a thousand generations<\/em> (see also 34:6-7; Deut 7:9). • <em>reject<\/em> (literally <em>hate<\/em>): The Hebrew words commonly translated “love” (Exod 20:6) and “hate” are difficult to translate into English because they include an act of the will as well as the emotional element we are familiar with. In biblical thinking, to “love” is to choose something and to act consistently in accord with that choice. To “hate” is to reject something and to act in ways consistent with that choice. The choice is connected to emotion: Feeling expresses itself in choices, and our choices show how we really feel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:5-6<\/strong> <em>jealous God:<\/em> God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • <em>in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations:<\/em> It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending the effects of obedience to <em>a thousand generations<\/em> (see also 34:6-7; Deut 7:9). • <em>reject<\/em> (literally <em>hate<\/em>): The Hebrew words commonly translated “love” (Exod 20:6) and “hate” are difficult to translate into English because they include an act of the will as well as the emotional element we are familiar with. In biblical thinking, to “love” is to choose something and to act consistently in accord with that choice. To “hate” is to reject something and to act in ways consistent with that choice. The choice is connected to emotion: Feeling expresses itself in choices, and our choices show how we really feel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:5-6 jealous God: God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations: It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending...","summary_en":"20:5-6 jealous God: God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations: It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99093,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:5","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:5-6<\/strong> <em>jealous God:<\/em> God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • <em>in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations:<\/em> It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending the effects of obedience to <em>a thousand generations<\/em> (see also 34:6-7; Deut 7:9). • <em>reject<\/em> (literally <em>hate<\/em>): The Hebrew words commonly translated “love” (Exod 20:6) and “hate” are difficult to translate into English because they include an act of the will as well as the emotional element we are familiar with. In biblical thinking, to “love” is to choose something and to act consistently in accord with that choice. To “hate” is to reject something and to act in ways consistent with that choice. The choice is connected to emotion: Feeling expresses itself in choices, and our choices show how we really feel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:5-6<\/strong> <em>jealous God:<\/em> God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • <em>in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations:<\/em> It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending the effects of obedience to <em>a thousand generations<\/em> (see also 34:6-7; Deut 7:9). • <em>reject<\/em> (literally <em>hate<\/em>): The Hebrew words commonly translated “love” (Exod 20:6) and “hate” are difficult to translate into English because they include an act of the will as well as the emotional element we are familiar with. In biblical thinking, to “love” is to choose something and to act consistently in accord with that choice. To “hate” is to reject something and to act in ways consistent with that choice. The choice is connected to emotion: Feeling expresses itself in choices, and our choices show how we really feel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:5-6 jealous God: God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations: It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending...","summary_en":"20:5-6 jealous God: God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations: It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126719,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:5","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:5-6<\/strong> <em>jealous God:<\/em> God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • <em>in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations:<\/em> It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending the effects of obedience to <em>a thousand generations<\/em> (see also 34:6-7; Deut 7:9). • <em>reject<\/em> (literally <em>hate<\/em>): The Hebrew words commonly translated “love” (Exod 20:6) and “hate” are difficult to translate into English because they include an act of the will as well as the emotional element we are familiar with. In biblical thinking, to “love” is to choose something and to act consistently in accord with that choice. To “hate” is to reject something and to act in ways consistent with that choice. The choice is connected to emotion: Feeling expresses itself in choices, and our choices show how we really feel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:5-6<\/strong> <em>jealous God:<\/em> God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • <em>in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations:<\/em> It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending the effects of obedience to <em>a thousand generations<\/em> (see also 34:6-7; Deut 7:9). • <em>reject<\/em> (literally <em>hate<\/em>): The Hebrew words commonly translated “love” (Exod 20:6) and “hate” are difficult to translate into English because they include an act of the will as well as the emotional element we are familiar with. In biblical thinking, to “love” is to choose something and to act consistently in accord with that choice. To “hate” is to reject something and to act in ways consistent with that choice. The choice is connected to emotion: Feeling expresses itself in choices, and our choices show how we really feel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:5-6 jealous God: God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations: It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending...","summary_en":"20:5-6 jealous God: God is passionately opposed to our prostituting ourselves with false gods (see Josh 24:19-20). • in the third and fourth generations . . . for a thousand generations: It is important to keep both sides of this equation together. God does not punish children for their parents’ sins. Rather, he is saying that our sins affect future generations of descendants. But he is also restricting the natural effects of those sins to three or four generations, while graciously extending...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60360,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60942,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","title_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","content_ro":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","summary_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87986,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88568,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","title_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","content_ro":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","summary_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115612,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116194,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","title_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","content_ro":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","summary_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143238,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143820,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","title_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","content_ro":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\n<p>Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\n<p>Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\n<p>But what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\n<p>To understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Because we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\n<p>None of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","summary_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":11434,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Exodus","title_en":"Book of Exodus","content_ro":"<h3>EXODUS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives the basis for this religious, political, and social life.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the book of Exodus is so frequently referred to in the OT and NT that theologians speak of an “exodus motif.” In Psalm 68, for example, David received assurance in remembering that his God was the same one who rescued Israel from Egypt. The prophet Jeremiah compared the future regathering of Israel to their exodus from Egypt as an even more miraculous event (Jer 16:14-15). The return of Jesus and his parents from Egypt is associated with the exodus in Matthew 2:13-15. The deliverance of the Jewish people from Egypt was interpreted as a prototype for God’s freeing of all his people, both Israel and the church. Thus, the message of the book of Exodus is foundational to understanding God’s plan of salvation throughout the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The English title “Exodus” comes from the Septuagint, a pre-Christian translation of the OT into Greek. The word means “a way out” or “departure” and refers to Israel’s rescue from Egypt. The Hebrew title is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shemoth<\/span> (“these are the names”), from the book’s opening words, referring to the names of the sons of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>According to tradition, Exodus and the entire Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) were written by Moses. Exodus was probably written at Mt Sinai or shortly after the events there, according to this view. There is much to support that claim: (1) The book states that Moses wrote God’s words in at least one book (Ex 17:14; 24:2, 7; 34:27-28). According to Deuteronomy 31:9, 24, Moses recorded God’s law in a book that was deposited beside the ark of the covenant as a witness for God. (2) Many OT writers referred to portions of Exodus as the “law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3; 2 Chr 34:14; Neh 8:1; 13:1). The NT, including the testimony of Jesus, calls Moses the author (Mk 7:10; 12:26; Jn 1:45; 7:19).<\/p>\n<p>Various other theories about the origin of Exodus have been proposed. Some scholars credit Moses with writing nearly the entire book. One writer claims that Moses was an unknown desert sheikh who never even met the Israelites. Some critics think they detect in the book several documents from various periods in Israel’s history that were finally put together by an editor centuries after Moses’ death. Others have isolated various literary forms, such as the “Song of Moses” (Ex 15), and traced their development. Another interpretation says that the exodus story was passed on by word of mouth for many generations before being written.<\/p>\n<p>Although such theories are held by biblical scholars, they deny what the text of the book repeatedly affirms: that Moses wrote Exodus. The book of Exodus contains evidence of being written by an eyewitness. Only such a person would recall, for example, that there were 12 fountains and 70 palm trees at Elim (Ex 15:27). The author shows a thorough knowledge of Egyptian court life, customs, and language. Some of the materials used to construct the tabernacle, such as acacia wood for its furniture (25:10) and rams’ skins for the outer covering (v 5), are found in Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula but not in Palestine. The book thus seems to have had a desert setting.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was not only commissioned by God to write the book of Exodus, but he was also well qualified. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty in his words and deeds” (Acts 7:22, <span>rsv<\/span>). In addition, the 40 years spent in the wilderness of Midian and Sinai gave him a thorough knowledge of the geography and wildlife of the regions through which the Israelites traveled. The events of the exodus—deliverance from the Egyptians and God’s giving of the law—were so central to the history of Israel that Moses took special care to preserve the record so it could be passed on to following generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>If one accepts the traditional view that Moses wrote Exodus, then the book is to be dated in the time of Moses. Two dates are generally suggested for the exodus from Egypt.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The “Late Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh who oppressed the Israelites was Seti I (Sethos, c. 1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Ramses II (c. 1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). The exodus would thus have occurred in 1290, and the conquest of Canaan would have begun in 1250. There are two principal arguments for this view: (1) According to Exodus 1:11, the Israelites were forced to build the store city of Rameses; therefore, Ramses II must have been ruling at the time. But the city of Rameses could have existed earlier under a different name and then been renamed after Ramses II when he rebuilt it. Or there could have been an earlier monarch named Ramses who commissioned its construction. (2) There is archaeological evidence of movements of people and widespread destruction in Canaan around 1250 <span>BC<\/span>. If this destruction was caused by the Hebrew conquest under Joshua, it would place the exodus around 1290. But it could just as easily have been the result of social turbulence and anarchy in the period of the Israelite judges, or of the military activities of neighboring peoples.<\/p>\n<h5>The “Early Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh of the oppression was Thutmose III (c. 1504–1450 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Amenhotep II (c. 1450–1424 <span>BC<\/span>). Thus, the exodus would have occurred about 1440, and the conquest would have begun around 1400. Three chief arguments support that view: (1) If the fourth year of King Solomon was 966 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 would place the exodus at 1446. (2) If the time of Jephthah was 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 300 years of Judges 11:26 would date the conquest at 1400. (3) The late date would not leave enough time for the period of the judges, which most chronologies indicate lasted between 300 and 400 years. On the basis of such biblical references to the date of the exodus, the early date appears preferable.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Some events in Egypt during the period covered by the book of Exodus shed additional light on the biblical record. Exodus 12:40 records that the Israelites lived in Egypt for 430 years. That would place the settling of Jacob and his family in Goshen (Gn 47:4, 11) at about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>, during the powerful 12th dynasty of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom. Around the turn of the century, two weaker dynasties followed. Semite invaders from Asia began to infiltrate northern (or Lower) Egypt. Those outsiders, known as the Hyksos, were able to displace the native dynasty with their own king around 1730. That was the “new king” who “did not know Joseph” (Ex 1:8). Being foreigners themselves, they were naturally concerned about the Israelites, who were too many and too mighty for them (v 9). Enslavement was the easiest solution to the problem of the Israelites. The Hyksos kings could use the new source of labor to enlarge Rameses, at that time the capital of Lower Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Not until about 1580 <span>BC<\/span> were the Egyptians, led by Ahmose, able to drive out the Hyksos and reestablish an Egyptian line of kings. Because the Israelites were still multiplying, despite their hard labor, the pharaohs of the 18th dynasty continued their bondage and decreed that all male children must be killed. When Moses was born (c. 1560 <span>BC<\/span>), that edict was still in effect. Thutmose I (1539–1514), the great empire builder and third of that dynasty, was pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>Thutmose I’s only surviving legal heir was a daughter, Hatshepsut. Her husband assumed the name Thutmose II (1514–1504). When he died, another of the pharaoh’s descendants was named the successor—Thutmose III (1504–1450), who was ten years old at the time. Hatshepsut took the kingdom from the young ruler and controlled it for 22 years (1503–1482). Such a strong-willed woman could have the nerve to disobey her father’s command by saving the life of a Hebrew baby and raising him in the palace at Thebes.<\/p>\n<p>Hatshepsut, who continued to rule despite Thutmose III’s coronation, possibly intended for Moses to have the throne, or at least a high position in the realm. Thutmose III, once he had full power after Hatshepsut’s death, would have been eager to do away with Moses. Moses’ hurried flight into the wilderness after killing the overseer fits well with such historical possibilities. Thutmose III’s death in 1450 <span>BC<\/span> opened the way for Moses to return and confront Pharaoh Amenhotep II with God’s command, “Let my people go.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the book of Exodus is to show how God’s promise to Abraham (Gn 15:12-16) was fulfilled when the Lord rescued the Israelite descendants of Abraham from Egyptian bondage. It also explains the origin of the Passover festival, the beginning of the nation by God’s establishment of a covenant with Israel, and the giving of the law on Mt Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus tells the moving story of a mighty God, creator of the universe, beyond all limitations of time and space, who intervenes in history on behalf of a helpless group of slaves. God defeats the ruler of the greatest empire on earth and then leads his oppressed people from that land to freedom. Exodus is the story of a single family that providentially grows into a multitude. Through God’s covenant a nation is formed, and through his law the nation is given stability and set apart from all its neighbors. The book of Exodus tells of an unusual man, whose 80 years of preparation are equally divided between the palace of a king and the pasture of a nomadic priest. Moses is a reluctant leader, but he defies the pharaoh, speaks with God face-to-face, and writes nearly one-fourth of the Hebrew Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>The God of Exodus is faithful. He makes promises and keeps them. Genesis 15:13-16 records an amazing prophecy: “Then the <span>Lord<\/span> said to Abram, ‘Know of a surety that your descendants will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs, and will be slaves there, and they will be oppressed for four hundred years; but I will bring judgment on the nation which they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. . . . And they shall come back here in the fourth generation’ ” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In response to this promise, Joseph, “at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his burial” (Heb 11:22, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>That promise provides a background for the drama of redemption on which the book of Exodus focuses. Redemption can be defined as “deliverance from the power of an alien dominion, and enjoyment of the resulting freedom.” It speaks of a deliverer and what he does to achieve deliverance. The book of Exodus is full of the vocabulary of redemption. It tells of the God who “remembers” his promise to the Hebrew patriarchs (Ex 2:24; 6:5). God “comes down to deliver” the Israelites (3:8), or “save” them (14:30; 15:2), in order to “bring them” out of the land of Egypt (3:10-12). Redemption involves these aspects:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Lord is the author of redemption. In Exodus 6:1-8, as God answered Moses’ prayer to deliver his people, he used the pronoun “I” 18 times to emphasize that he was the one initiating the action. The Hebrew descendants of Abraham had known God primarily by the Hebrew name “El,” a common title in the ancient Near East for the supreme deity. But in Exodus, Israel learned that God is “Jehovah” or “Yahweh.” That is his personal name, a reminder that he is the God of the covenant who personally cares for his people’s welfare. In Exodus 3:14, God told Moses, “I am who I am” or “I will be who I will be.” Some scholars think that statement shows that the name Yahweh comes from the Hebrew verb “to be.” In any case, the concept of “name” in the Hebrew culture is synonymous with “character.” To know the name of God is to know something of his character. Israel knew God as the one who is eternally self-existent yet present with them wherever they would go, acting on their behalf (Ex 3:12; 33:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. The reason for redemption was God’s promise to the forefathers of the Israelites. When God heard the groaning of the people of Israel, he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob (Ex 2:24; cf. 6:5). In response to their need, he selected an agent of redemption, the unwilling Moses. Moses exhausted every possible excuse, but God would not take no for an answer. Moses is a vivid example of how God prepares, empowers, and sustains his chosen servants, using them to accomplish his purpose.<\/li>\n<li>3. The motive of redemption was God’s grace and love (Ex 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7). The purpose of redemption was that Israel and the Egyptians might know God (6:7; 7:5; 8:10; 14:18). The Lord worked so that all who were involved—Moses, the Israelites, Pharaoh, and the Egyptians—would be sure that he alone is God. The Hebrew understanding of knowledge is not primarily intellectual but experience-oriented. The desired response to God’s action is not mere mental assent but also faith and obedience.<\/li>\n<li>4. Redemption is achieved in Exodus by miracles (4:21)—all natural processes controlled supernaturally by God. They are variously described as signs and wonders (7:3), great acts of judgment (6:6; 7:4), and “the finger of God” (8:19). Such miracles were not frivolous fireworks but purposeful works of God. Some of the miracles prove that Moses was sent by God. The miraculous plagues proved that God is supreme, for each of them was a direct challenge to one of the gods of Egypt: Osiris the river god, Yeqt the frog god, Ra (Re) the sun god, Athor the cattle god. The miracles in the wilderness proved that God fulfills all the needs of his people.<\/li>\n<li>5. The pharaoh was the villain—a picture of rebellious humanity confronted by God’s command (Ex 4:21-23). Ten times the pharaoh hardened his heart. Yet, in a sense, it was God who hardened the pharaoh’s heart, effecting the king’s decision to defy him.<\/li>\n<li>6. The Passover marked the purchase of redemption (Ex 12:23-27; 15:16). It was a clear example of salvation by substitution. When the death angel saw the blood on the doorposts and lintels, he passed by.<\/li>\n<li>7. The recipients of God’s redemption in Exodus were the Israelites. God took them as his own special people (6:7), and they were no longer free to do as they pleased. Even before the exodus he had claimed them, telling Pharaoh, “Israel is my first-born son, and I say to you, ‘Let my son go that he may serve me’ ” (4:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/li>\n<li>8. The demand of redemption was obedience. On the basis of his deliverance of the Israelites from bondage, God set forth the Ten Commandments (20:1-17) and the rest of the law for them to obey. The people, though quick to pledge their obedience (19:8; 24:3), were even quicker to disobey (32:8). Because the Lord is holy and wants his people to be holy and wholehearted in devotion (34:14), he must punish iniquity. But being compassionate, he also forgives. Throughout the centuries of Israel’s history, God pleaded with his people through the prophets to remember the exodus and repent (see Mi 6:3-4). The faithful responded in gratitude with Moses’ “song of redemption” (Ex 15; cf. Rv 15:3-4).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus can be divided into four sections, each describing one aspect of God’s dealings with the Israelites during the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Unveiling (Ex 1–6)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus begins with the 70 descendants of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt for the duration of a famine that was afflicting their land (cf. Gn 46–50). After more than a century of prosperity for the Israelites in the land of Goshen, a new dynasty is established in Egypt whose leaders are not friendly toward Israel. In order to stem the rapid growth of the Hebrew people, the Egyptians force them to do hard labor, building storage cities for the pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>A further command requires all Israelite male children to be killed at birth. The superintendents of the midwives do not comply, however, and God rewards them—not to show his approval of their lie but because they fear and obey God rather than the pharaoh. A new command calls for all male Israelite babies to be drowned in the Nile River. One special child, who escapes when Pharaoh’s daughter has his basket fished out of the Nile, is Moses. Ironically, Moses’ mother is paid by the princess to raise her own child, who grows up in the palace as the princess’s adopted son.<\/p>\n<p>As an adult, Moses chooses to identify with his Hebrew kin, a tribute to the early instruction given him by his godly parents (see Heb 11:24-26). He sets out to liberate Israel from the Egyptians, one man at a time. But he has to flee to Midian, at the eastern edge of the Sinai Peninsula or in Arabia beyond the northern top of the Gulf of Aqaba. Moses marries into the household of Jethro, also named Reuel. Reuel (“friend of God”) is probably the man’s personal name, and Jethro (“excellence”) his title. Because he is called a “priest of Midian” (Ex 2:16), some scholars have maintained a “Kenite hypothesis,” suggesting that Moses adopted the religion of his father-in-law and taught it to the Israelites. But the Bible states that Moses received his religion by a direct revelation from God. Jethro seems to believe only after he sees that God has rescued Israel from the Egyptians (18:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>While their future deliverer is in Midian, the Israelites continue to be oppressed and cry out to God in their misery (2:23-25). God responds by descending to his people. He came down to rescue Israel (3:8). He appears to Moses in a burning bush and identifies himself as the same God who promised the patriarchs a land “flowing with milk and honey” (3:17). Moses will lead the Israelites there, assisted by his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\n<p>Assured that God’s presence and miraculous signs will accompany him, Moses takes his wife Zipporah and his two sons and departs for Egypt. On the way, the Lord meets him and seeks to put him to death (4:24). That is probably the Hebrew way of saying that God strikes him with a mortal illness. Moses, who is going to deliver God’s people, has neglected the sign of the covenant in failing to circumcise one of his sons (Gn 17:14). Moses recovers after the rite is performed and continues on to Egypt, meeting Aaron at Mt Sinai. Their reception by the Israelites is more cordial than that of Pharaoh, who refuses to honor the God who sent Moses. Instead of releasing the Israelites to offer sacrifices to their God in the wilderness, he increases their burdens. The people complain to Moses, and Moses complains to God. God appears again to Moses (Ex 6), reassuring him that Israel will be delivered by divine power. God’s plan is not a failure—he is just beginning to put it into action.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Deliverance (Ex 7–19)<\/h5>\n<p>Chapters 7–12 record ten plagues with which God afflicts the Egyptians. Even before the first of them, the pharaoh has hardened his heart to defy God (7:13). There are three cycles of three plagues each:<\/p>\n\n<p> The first three plagues affect both the Egyptians and the Israelites; the Israelites are protected from the final six. The Egyptian magicians are able to duplicate the first two plagues, but when the third strikes, they admit, “This is the finger of God” (8:19). After the plague of flies covers the land, the pharaoh offers Moses the first of four compromises, but Moses refuses all of them (8:25-29; 10:8-11, 24-29). The first plagues are merely unpleasant, but the final ones are destructive and inflict much suffering. Since all of the plagues are common to that area, they themselves are not miraculous. The miracle is how the phenomena are multiplied and limited to the land of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The nine plagues serve to harden the pharaoh’s heart even more, so God prepares one final stroke. The death of every firstborn male, among both animals and humans, will be the fatal blow. God warns the Israelites to get ready to leave. To avert the death angel, they must put blood from an unblemished yearling male sheep or goat on their doorways. While they are eating the Passover meal, the death angel begins moving through the land of Egypt. In anguish the pharaoh drives the Israelites from the land; the slaves are free at last. Just as he has promised, the Lord goes before the children of Israel in a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night.<\/p>\n<p>But once again the pharaoh’s heart is hardened and he gives pursuit. God parts the waters of the sea with a great wind. The literal meaning of the name given that body of water is “sea of reeds.” It could refer to any shoreline where the water is sufficiently shallow for such plants to grow (see 1 Kgs 9:26, where the same term refers to the Gulf of Aqaba near Eloth). Whatever the location, there God hands the Egyptians their final defeat. The rescue is complete.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the Israelites respond with renewed faith in the Lord and with a song of victory and praise (Ex 14:31–15:21). Soon, however, thanksgiving turns into grumbling because of bitter water (15:22-26), lack of meat and bread (16:1-15), and lack of water (17:1-7). In each situation God provides for their need. He also gives them victory over the Amalekites (vv 8-16). As the Israelites approach Mt Sinai, Moses’ family rejoins him, accompanied by Jethro. Jethro now confesses his faith in the God of the Israelites and shares in a fellowship meal with the leaders. He also assists Moses in reorganizing the judicial system, then returns to Midian (ch 18).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites arrive at Mt Sinai, also called Horeb (3:1), and prepare to meet the Lord who has rescued them in fulfillment of his promise to Moses (v 12). The Lord establishes his covenant with Israel, taking them as his own possession, “a kingdom of priests, my holy nation.” They quickly respond, “We will certainly do everything the <span>Lord<\/span> asks of us” (19:5-8, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Instruction (Ex 20–24)<\/h5>\n<p>The God who redeems a people, who literally “buys them back from slavery,” has a right to make certain demands of them. The commandments God gives to Israel at Sinai are not burdensome requirements but protective guidelines for living as God’s people (20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Law (or Torah, meaning “instruction”) revealed at Sinai consists of three parts:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Ten Commandments (ch 20), addressing a person’s relationship to God and other people. Based on God’s nature (and therefore permanent), the Ten Commandments are unique in the history of the nations.<\/p>\n<li>2. The judgments (chs 21–23), social regulations for governing the people as a theocracy, similar in many ways to the law codes of Israel’s neighbors.<\/li>\n<li>3. Ordinances (chs 24–31) regulating religious ceremonies.<\/li>\n<p>All of the laws are given to Moses during the weeks he spends with God on the mountain.<\/p>\n<p>The Ten Commandments form the basis of all other laws in Israel (20:1-17). The first five deal with honoring the Lord, the second five with respecting one’s neighbor. The last commandment deals with one’s thoughts and intentions rather than with specific actions. It thus forms a safeguard against all sins not included in the first nine.<\/p>\n<p>The judgments recorded in chapters 21–23 deal with master-slave relationships (21:1-11), offenses punishable by death (vv 12-17), compensation for injury to persons or damage to property (21:18–22:15), various interpersonal relationships (22:16–23:9), and Sabbaths, feasts, and the offering of firstfruits (23:10-19). Many of the judgments would not take effect until Israel settled in the Promised Land. Accordingly, that section of the Law closes with a solemn warning against being rebellious and adopting pagan ways. It also contains a bright promise that God will drive out Israel’s enemies, protect his people from sickness, and grant them prosperity, if they obey the Lord’s commands (23:22).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 24 records a reaffirmation of the covenant between God and Israel, as Moses seals it with the blood of a sacrifice. In response, God appears to the leaders of the people, giving them a glimpse of his splendor. Then Moses ascends the mountain one more time to receive the stone tablets containing the commandments, as well as further instructions regarding the meeting tent (tabernacle), the priesthood, and worship.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Presence with his People (Ex 25–40)<\/h5>\n<p>After the Lord redeemed the Israelites, he told Moses, “I will make you my own special people, and I will be your God. And you will know that I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God who has rescued you from your slavery in Egypt” (6:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses had seen that wonderful promise fulfilled, yet one further step remained: “I want the people of Israel to build me a sacred residence where I can live among them” (25:8). God’s dwelling among his people is possible because God had descended to deliver the people and because they had pledged to meet his demands. God calls for a contribution from all whose hearts were willing to give, and he shows Moses a detailed pattern of the tabernacle and its furniture. Aaron and his sons are set apart to serve in the tent. Stipulations for the various offerings, including the Day of Atonement, are given. God tells Moses that he has chosen Bezalel and Oholiab to build the tabernacle and to craft its furnishings, having filled them with his Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime the Israelites, who so recently promised total obedience, grow impatient as Moses lingers for 40 days on the mountain. They demand that Aaron make an idol for them. Under pressure, Aaron complies and forms a molten calf, a representation of a pagan deity (32:4).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord informs Moses of the people’s idolatry, revelry, and immorality and says that he is angry enough to destroy all of them and start again with Moses’ offspring. Moses pleads for Israel until the Lord relents, then descends from the mountain to punish the people. Moses pleads again for forgiveness for Israel, and God in mercy pardons their terrible sin (34:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Once more God offers to make a covenant with the people (34:10). Moses spends another 40 days with the Lord, writing the commandments on tablets to replace those smashed when he saw the golden calf. When he returns to the people, his face shines from being in God’s presence, and he must keep it veiled.<\/p>\n<p>Now that Israel has been restored to God’s favor, the construction of the tabernacle can begin. The contributions are so generous that Moses must restrain the people from bringing any more. Finally, all is ready. Moses examines the tabernacle, and it is erected on the first day of the first month, nearly a year after the first Passover. The priests are consecrated, the lamps are lit, and the first burnt sacrifice is offered. A cloud descends, filling the tabernacle with the glory of the Lord. God dwells among his people, the goal of redemption has been attained, and the drama of the book of Exodus has come to an end.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Israel, History of; Moses; Plagues upon Egypt; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EXODUS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives the basis for this religious, political, and social life.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the book of Exodus is so frequently referred to in the OT and NT that theologians speak of an “exodus motif.” In Psalm 68, for example, David received assurance in remembering that his God was the same one who rescued Israel from Egypt. The prophet Jeremiah compared the future regathering of Israel to their exodus from Egypt as an even more miraculous event (Jer 16:14-15). The return of Jesus and his parents from Egypt is associated with the exodus in Matthew 2:13-15. The deliverance of the Jewish people from Egypt was interpreted as a prototype for God’s freeing of all his people, both Israel and the church. Thus, the message of the book of Exodus is foundational to understanding God’s plan of salvation throughout the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The English title “Exodus” comes from the Septuagint, a pre-Christian translation of the OT into Greek. The word means “a way out” or “departure” and refers to Israel’s rescue from Egypt. The Hebrew title is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shemoth<\/span> (“these are the names”), from the book’s opening words, referring to the names of the sons of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>According to tradition, Exodus and the entire Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) were written by Moses. Exodus was probably written at Mt Sinai or shortly after the events there, according to this view. There is much to support that claim: (1) The book states that Moses wrote God’s words in at least one book (Ex 17:14; 24:2, 7; 34:27-28). According to Deuteronomy 31:9, 24, Moses recorded God’s law in a book that was deposited beside the ark of the covenant as a witness for God. (2) Many OT writers referred to portions of Exodus as the “law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3; 2 Chr 34:14; Neh 8:1; 13:1). The NT, including the testimony of Jesus, calls Moses the author (Mk 7:10; 12:26; Jn 1:45; 7:19).<\/p>\n<p>Various other theories about the origin of Exodus have been proposed. Some scholars credit Moses with writing nearly the entire book. One writer claims that Moses was an unknown desert sheikh who never even met the Israelites. Some critics think they detect in the book several documents from various periods in Israel’s history that were finally put together by an editor centuries after Moses’ death. Others have isolated various literary forms, such as the “Song of Moses” (Ex 15), and traced their development. Another interpretation says that the exodus story was passed on by word of mouth for many generations before being written.<\/p>\n<p>Although such theories are held by biblical scholars, they deny what the text of the book repeatedly affirms: that Moses wrote Exodus. The book of Exodus contains evidence of being written by an eyewitness. Only such a person would recall, for example, that there were 12 fountains and 70 palm trees at Elim (Ex 15:27). The author shows a thorough knowledge of Egyptian court life, customs, and language. Some of the materials used to construct the tabernacle, such as acacia wood for its furniture (25:10) and rams’ skins for the outer covering (v 5), are found in Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula but not in Palestine. The book thus seems to have had a desert setting.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was not only commissioned by God to write the book of Exodus, but he was also well qualified. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty in his words and deeds” (Acts 7:22, <span>rsv<\/span>). In addition, the 40 years spent in the wilderness of Midian and Sinai gave him a thorough knowledge of the geography and wildlife of the regions through which the Israelites traveled. The events of the exodus—deliverance from the Egyptians and God’s giving of the law—were so central to the history of Israel that Moses took special care to preserve the record so it could be passed on to following generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>If one accepts the traditional view that Moses wrote Exodus, then the book is to be dated in the time of Moses. Two dates are generally suggested for the exodus from Egypt.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The “Late Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh who oppressed the Israelites was Seti I (Sethos, c. 1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Ramses II (c. 1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). The exodus would thus have occurred in 1290, and the conquest of Canaan would have begun in 1250. There are two principal arguments for this view: (1) According to Exodus 1:11, the Israelites were forced to build the store city of Rameses; therefore, Ramses II must have been ruling at the time. But the city of Rameses could have existed earlier under a different name and then been renamed after Ramses II when he rebuilt it. Or there could have been an earlier monarch named Ramses who commissioned its construction. (2) There is archaeological evidence of movements of people and widespread destruction in Canaan around 1250 <span>BC<\/span>. If this destruction was caused by the Hebrew conquest under Joshua, it would place the exodus around 1290. But it could just as easily have been the result of social turbulence and anarchy in the period of the Israelite judges, or of the military activities of neighboring peoples.<\/p>\n<h5>The “Early Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh of the oppression was Thutmose III (c. 1504–1450 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Amenhotep II (c. 1450–1424 <span>BC<\/span>). Thus, the exodus would have occurred about 1440, and the conquest would have begun around 1400. Three chief arguments support that view: (1) If the fourth year of King Solomon was 966 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 would place the exodus at 1446. (2) If the time of Jephthah was 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 300 years of Judges 11:26 would date the conquest at 1400. (3) The late date would not leave enough time for the period of the judges, which most chronologies indicate lasted between 300 and 400 years. On the basis of such biblical references to the date of the exodus, the early date appears preferable.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Some events in Egypt during the period covered by the book of Exodus shed additional light on the biblical record. Exodus 12:40 records that the Israelites lived in Egypt for 430 years. That would place the settling of Jacob and his family in Goshen (Gn 47:4, 11) at about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>, during the powerful 12th dynasty of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom. Around the turn of the century, two weaker dynasties followed. Semite invaders from Asia began to infiltrate northern (or Lower) Egypt. Those outsiders, known as the Hyksos, were able to displace the native dynasty with their own king around 1730. That was the “new king” who “did not know Joseph” (Ex 1:8). Being foreigners themselves, they were naturally concerned about the Israelites, who were too many and too mighty for them (v 9). Enslavement was the easiest solution to the problem of the Israelites. The Hyksos kings could use the new source of labor to enlarge Rameses, at that time the capital of Lower Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Not until about 1580 <span>BC<\/span> were the Egyptians, led by Ahmose, able to drive out the Hyksos and reestablish an Egyptian line of kings. Because the Israelites were still multiplying, despite their hard labor, the pharaohs of the 18th dynasty continued their bondage and decreed that all male children must be killed. When Moses was born (c. 1560 <span>BC<\/span>), that edict was still in effect. Thutmose I (1539–1514), the great empire builder and third of that dynasty, was pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>Thutmose I’s only surviving legal heir was a daughter, Hatshepsut. Her husband assumed the name Thutmose II (1514–1504). When he died, another of the pharaoh’s descendants was named the successor—Thutmose III (1504–1450), who was ten years old at the time. Hatshepsut took the kingdom from the young ruler and controlled it for 22 years (1503–1482). Such a strong-willed woman could have the nerve to disobey her father’s command by saving the life of a Hebrew baby and raising him in the palace at Thebes.<\/p>\n<p>Hatshepsut, who continued to rule despite Thutmose III’s coronation, possibly intended for Moses to have the throne, or at least a high position in the realm. Thutmose III, once he had full power after Hatshepsut’s death, would have been eager to do away with Moses. Moses’ hurried flight into the wilderness after killing the overseer fits well with such historical possibilities. Thutmose III’s death in 1450 <span>BC<\/span> opened the way for Moses to return and confront Pharaoh Amenhotep II with God’s command, “Let my people go.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the book of Exodus is to show how God’s promise to Abraham (Gn 15:12-16) was fulfilled when the Lord rescued the Israelite descendants of Abraham from Egyptian bondage. It also explains the origin of the Passover festival, the beginning of the nation by God’s establishment of a covenant with Israel, and the giving of the law on Mt Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus tells the moving story of a mighty God, creator of the universe, beyond all limitations of time and space, who intervenes in history on behalf of a helpless group of slaves. God defeats the ruler of the greatest empire on earth and then leads his oppressed people from that land to freedom. Exodus is the story of a single family that providentially grows into a multitude. Through God’s covenant a nation is formed, and through his law the nation is given stability and set apart from all its neighbors. The book of Exodus tells of an unusual man, whose 80 years of preparation are equally divided between the palace of a king and the pasture of a nomadic priest. Moses is a reluctant leader, but he defies the pharaoh, speaks with God face-to-face, and writes nearly one-fourth of the Hebrew Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>The God of Exodus is faithful. He makes promises and keeps them. Genesis 15:13-16 records an amazing prophecy: “Then the <span>Lord<\/span> said to Abram, ‘Know of a surety that your descendants will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs, and will be slaves there, and they will be oppressed for four hundred years; but I will bring judgment on the nation which they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. . . . And they shall come back here in the fourth generation’ ” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In response to this promise, Joseph, “at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his burial” (Heb 11:22, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>That promise provides a background for the drama of redemption on which the book of Exodus focuses. Redemption can be defined as “deliverance from the power of an alien dominion, and enjoyment of the resulting freedom.” It speaks of a deliverer and what he does to achieve deliverance. The book of Exodus is full of the vocabulary of redemption. It tells of the God who “remembers” his promise to the Hebrew patriarchs (Ex 2:24; 6:5). God “comes down to deliver” the Israelites (3:8), or “save” them (14:30; 15:2), in order to “bring them” out of the land of Egypt (3:10-12). Redemption involves these aspects:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Lord is the author of redemption. In Exodus 6:1-8, as God answered Moses’ prayer to deliver his people, he used the pronoun “I” 18 times to emphasize that he was the one initiating the action. The Hebrew descendants of Abraham had known God primarily by the Hebrew name “El,” a common title in the ancient Near East for the supreme deity. But in Exodus, Israel learned that God is “Jehovah” or “Yahweh.” That is his personal name, a reminder that he is the God of the covenant who personally cares for his people’s welfare. In Exodus 3:14, God told Moses, “I am who I am” or “I will be who I will be.” Some scholars think that statement shows that the name Yahweh comes from the Hebrew verb “to be.” In any case, the concept of “name” in the Hebrew culture is synonymous with “character.” To know the name of God is to know something of his character. Israel knew God as the one who is eternally self-existent yet present with them wherever they would go, acting on their behalf (Ex 3:12; 33:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. The reason for redemption was God’s promise to the forefathers of the Israelites. When God heard the groaning of the people of Israel, he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob (Ex 2:24; cf. 6:5). In response to their need, he selected an agent of redemption, the unwilling Moses. Moses exhausted every possible excuse, but God would not take no for an answer. Moses is a vivid example of how God prepares, empowers, and sustains his chosen servants, using them to accomplish his purpose.<\/li>\n<li>3. The motive of redemption was God’s grace and love (Ex 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7). The purpose of redemption was that Israel and the Egyptians might know God (6:7; 7:5; 8:10; 14:18). The Lord worked so that all who were involved—Moses, the Israelites, Pharaoh, and the Egyptians—would be sure that he alone is God. The Hebrew understanding of knowledge is not primarily intellectual but experience-oriented. The desired response to God’s action is not mere mental assent but also faith and obedience.<\/li>\n<li>4. Redemption is achieved in Exodus by miracles (4:21)—all natural processes controlled supernaturally by God. They are variously described as signs and wonders (7:3), great acts of judgment (6:6; 7:4), and “the finger of God” (8:19). Such miracles were not frivolous fireworks but purposeful works of God. Some of the miracles prove that Moses was sent by God. The miraculous plagues proved that God is supreme, for each of them was a direct challenge to one of the gods of Egypt: Osiris the river god, Yeqt the frog god, Ra (Re) the sun god, Athor the cattle god. The miracles in the wilderness proved that God fulfills all the needs of his people.<\/li>\n<li>5. The pharaoh was the villain—a picture of rebellious humanity confronted by God’s command (Ex 4:21-23). Ten times the pharaoh hardened his heart. Yet, in a sense, it was God who hardened the pharaoh’s heart, effecting the king’s decision to defy him.<\/li>\n<li>6. The Passover marked the purchase of redemption (Ex 12:23-27; 15:16). It was a clear example of salvation by substitution. When the death angel saw the blood on the doorposts and lintels, he passed by.<\/li>\n<li>7. The recipients of God’s redemption in Exodus were the Israelites. God took them as his own special people (6:7), and they were no longer free to do as they pleased. Even before the exodus he had claimed them, telling Pharaoh, “Israel is my first-born son, and I say to you, ‘Let my son go that he may serve me’ ” (4:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/li>\n<li>8. The demand of redemption was obedience. On the basis of his deliverance of the Israelites from bondage, God set forth the Ten Commandments (20:1-17) and the rest of the law for them to obey. The people, though quick to pledge their obedience (19:8; 24:3), were even quicker to disobey (32:8). Because the Lord is holy and wants his people to be holy and wholehearted in devotion (34:14), he must punish iniquity. But being compassionate, he also forgives. Throughout the centuries of Israel’s history, God pleaded with his people through the prophets to remember the exodus and repent (see Mi 6:3-4). The faithful responded in gratitude with Moses’ “song of redemption” (Ex 15; cf. Rv 15:3-4).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus can be divided into four sections, each describing one aspect of God’s dealings with the Israelites during the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Unveiling (Ex 1–6)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus begins with the 70 descendants of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt for the duration of a famine that was afflicting their land (cf. Gn 46–50). After more than a century of prosperity for the Israelites in the land of Goshen, a new dynasty is established in Egypt whose leaders are not friendly toward Israel. In order to stem the rapid growth of the Hebrew people, the Egyptians force them to do hard labor, building storage cities for the pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>A further command requires all Israelite male children to be killed at birth. The superintendents of the midwives do not comply, however, and God rewards them—not to show his approval of their lie but because they fear and obey God rather than the pharaoh. A new command calls for all male Israelite babies to be drowned in the Nile River. One special child, who escapes when Pharaoh’s daughter has his basket fished out of the Nile, is Moses. Ironically, Moses’ mother is paid by the princess to raise her own child, who grows up in the palace as the princess’s adopted son.<\/p>\n<p>As an adult, Moses chooses to identify with his Hebrew kin, a tribute to the early instruction given him by his godly parents (see Heb 11:24-26). He sets out to liberate Israel from the Egyptians, one man at a time. But he has to flee to Midian, at the eastern edge of the Sinai Peninsula or in Arabia beyond the northern top of the Gulf of Aqaba. Moses marries into the household of Jethro, also named Reuel. Reuel (“friend of God”) is probably the man’s personal name, and Jethro (“excellence”) his title. Because he is called a “priest of Midian” (Ex 2:16), some scholars have maintained a “Kenite hypothesis,” suggesting that Moses adopted the religion of his father-in-law and taught it to the Israelites. But the Bible states that Moses received his religion by a direct revelation from God. Jethro seems to believe only after he sees that God has rescued Israel from the Egyptians (18:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>While their future deliverer is in Midian, the Israelites continue to be oppressed and cry out to God in their misery (2:23-25). God responds by descending to his people. He came down to rescue Israel (3:8). He appears to Moses in a burning bush and identifies himself as the same God who promised the patriarchs a land “flowing with milk and honey” (3:17). Moses will lead the Israelites there, assisted by his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\n<p>Assured that God’s presence and miraculous signs will accompany him, Moses takes his wife Zipporah and his two sons and departs for Egypt. On the way, the Lord meets him and seeks to put him to death (4:24). That is probably the Hebrew way of saying that God strikes him with a mortal illness. Moses, who is going to deliver God’s people, has neglected the sign of the covenant in failing to circumcise one of his sons (Gn 17:14). Moses recovers after the rite is performed and continues on to Egypt, meeting Aaron at Mt Sinai. Their reception by the Israelites is more cordial than that of Pharaoh, who refuses to honor the God who sent Moses. Instead of releasing the Israelites to offer sacrifices to their God in the wilderness, he increases their burdens. The people complain to Moses, and Moses complains to God. God appears again to Moses (Ex 6), reassuring him that Israel will be delivered by divine power. God’s plan is not a failure—he is just beginning to put it into action.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Deliverance (Ex 7–19)<\/h5>\n<p>Chapters 7–12 record ten plagues with which God afflicts the Egyptians. Even before the first of them, the pharaoh has hardened his heart to defy God (7:13). There are three cycles of three plagues each:<\/p>\n\n<p> The first three plagues affect both the Egyptians and the Israelites; the Israelites are protected from the final six. The Egyptian magicians are able to duplicate the first two plagues, but when the third strikes, they admit, “This is the finger of God” (8:19). After the plague of flies covers the land, the pharaoh offers Moses the first of four compromises, but Moses refuses all of them (8:25-29; 10:8-11, 24-29). The first plagues are merely unpleasant, but the final ones are destructive and inflict much suffering. Since all of the plagues are common to that area, they themselves are not miraculous. The miracle is how the phenomena are multiplied and limited to the land of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The nine plagues serve to harden the pharaoh’s heart even more, so God prepares one final stroke. The death of every firstborn male, among both animals and humans, will be the fatal blow. God warns the Israelites to get ready to leave. To avert the death angel, they must put blood from an unblemished yearling male sheep or goat on their doorways. While they are eating the Passover meal, the death angel begins moving through the land of Egypt. In anguish the pharaoh drives the Israelites from the land; the slaves are free at last. Just as he has promised, the Lord goes before the children of Israel in a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night.<\/p>\n<p>But once again the pharaoh’s heart is hardened and he gives pursuit. God parts the waters of the sea with a great wind. The literal meaning of the name given that body of water is “sea of reeds.” It could refer to any shoreline where the water is sufficiently shallow for such plants to grow (see 1 Kgs 9:26, where the same term refers to the Gulf of Aqaba near Eloth). Whatever the location, there God hands the Egyptians their final defeat. The rescue is complete.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the Israelites respond with renewed faith in the Lord and with a song of victory and praise (Ex 14:31–15:21). Soon, however, thanksgiving turns into grumbling because of bitter water (15:22-26), lack of meat and bread (16:1-15), and lack of water (17:1-7). In each situation God provides for their need. He also gives them victory over the Amalekites (vv 8-16). As the Israelites approach Mt Sinai, Moses’ family rejoins him, accompanied by Jethro. Jethro now confesses his faith in the God of the Israelites and shares in a fellowship meal with the leaders. He also assists Moses in reorganizing the judicial system, then returns to Midian (ch 18).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites arrive at Mt Sinai, also called Horeb (3:1), and prepare to meet the Lord who has rescued them in fulfillment of his promise to Moses (v 12). The Lord establishes his covenant with Israel, taking them as his own possession, “a kingdom of priests, my holy nation.” They quickly respond, “We will certainly do everything the <span>Lord<\/span> asks of us” (19:5-8, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Instruction (Ex 20–24)<\/h5>\n<p>The God who redeems a people, who literally “buys them back from slavery,” has a right to make certain demands of them. The commandments God gives to Israel at Sinai are not burdensome requirements but protective guidelines for living as God’s people (20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Law (or Torah, meaning “instruction”) revealed at Sinai consists of three parts:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Ten Commandments (ch 20), addressing a person’s relationship to God and other people. Based on God’s nature (and therefore permanent), the Ten Commandments are unique in the history of the nations.<\/p>\n<li>2. The judgments (chs 21–23), social regulations for governing the people as a theocracy, similar in many ways to the law codes of Israel’s neighbors.<\/li>\n<li>3. Ordinances (chs 24–31) regulating religious ceremonies.<\/li>\n<p>All of the laws are given to Moses during the weeks he spends with God on the mountain.<\/p>\n<p>The Ten Commandments form the basis of all other laws in Israel (20:1-17). The first five deal with honoring the Lord, the second five with respecting one’s neighbor. The last commandment deals with one’s thoughts and intentions rather than with specific actions. It thus forms a safeguard against all sins not included in the first nine.<\/p>\n<p>The judgments recorded in chapters 21–23 deal with master-slave relationships (21:1-11), offenses punishable by death (vv 12-17), compensation for injury to persons or damage to property (21:18–22:15), various interpersonal relationships (22:16–23:9), and Sabbaths, feasts, and the offering of firstfruits (23:10-19). Many of the judgments would not take effect until Israel settled in the Promised Land. Accordingly, that section of the Law closes with a solemn warning against being rebellious and adopting pagan ways. It also contains a bright promise that God will drive out Israel’s enemies, protect his people from sickness, and grant them prosperity, if they obey the Lord’s commands (23:22).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 24 records a reaffirmation of the covenant between God and Israel, as Moses seals it with the blood of a sacrifice. In response, God appears to the leaders of the people, giving them a glimpse of his splendor. Then Moses ascends the mountain one more time to receive the stone tablets containing the commandments, as well as further instructions regarding the meeting tent (tabernacle), the priesthood, and worship.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Presence with his People (Ex 25–40)<\/h5>\n<p>After the Lord redeemed the Israelites, he told Moses, “I will make you my own special people, and I will be your God. And you will know that I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God who has rescued you from your slavery in Egypt” (6:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses had seen that wonderful promise fulfilled, yet one further step remained: “I want the people of Israel to build me a sacred residence where I can live among them” (25:8). God’s dwelling among his people is possible because God had descended to deliver the people and because they had pledged to meet his demands. God calls for a contribution from all whose hearts were willing to give, and he shows Moses a detailed pattern of the tabernacle and its furniture. Aaron and his sons are set apart to serve in the tent. Stipulations for the various offerings, including the Day of Atonement, are given. God tells Moses that he has chosen Bezalel and Oholiab to build the tabernacle and to craft its furnishings, having filled them with his Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime the Israelites, who so recently promised total obedience, grow impatient as Moses lingers for 40 days on the mountain. They demand that Aaron make an idol for them. Under pressure, Aaron complies and forms a molten calf, a representation of a pagan deity (32:4).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord informs Moses of the people’s idolatry, revelry, and immorality and says that he is angry enough to destroy all of them and start again with Moses’ offspring. Moses pleads for Israel until the Lord relents, then descends from the mountain to punish the people. Moses pleads again for forgiveness for Israel, and God in mercy pardons their terrible sin (34:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Once more God offers to make a covenant with the people (34:10). Moses spends another 40 days with the Lord, writing the commandments on tablets to replace those smashed when he saw the golden calf. When he returns to the people, his face shines from being in God’s presence, and he must keep it veiled.<\/p>\n<p>Now that Israel has been restored to God’s favor, the construction of the tabernacle can begin. The contributions are so generous that Moses must restrain the people from bringing any more. Finally, all is ready. Moses examines the tabernacle, and it is erected on the first day of the first month, nearly a year after the first Passover. The priests are consecrated, the lamps are lit, and the first burnt sacrifice is offered. A cloud descends, filling the tabernacle with the glory of the Lord. God dwells among his people, the goal of redemption has been attained, and the drama of the book of Exodus has come to an end.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Israel, History of; Moses; Plagues upon Egypt; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EXODUS, Book of Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus. Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives ...","summary_en":"EXODUS, Book of Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus. Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67972,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Symbolic Numbers","title_en":"Symbolic Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","summary_en":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95598,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Symbolic Numbers","title_en":"Symbolic Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","summary_en":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123224,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Symbolic Numbers","title_en":"Symbolic Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","summary_en":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150850,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Symbolic Numbers","title_en":"Symbolic Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","summary_en":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":7281,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandments, the Ten","title_en":"Commandments, the Ten","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28011,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Oath","title_en":"Oath","content_ro":"<h3>OATH<\/h3>\n<p>Solemn vow or promise to fulfill a pledge. There are two terms in Hebrew that mean “oath”: <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘ala<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sebu’a<\/span><em>.<\/em> The latter, more general term in ancient times meant to enter into a solemn (even magical) relationship with the number seven, although ancient connections are lost. Even so, when Abraham and Abimelech entered into an oath at Beersheba (the well of seven, or the well of the oath), Abraham set aside seven ewe lambs as a witness to the fact that he had dug a well (Gn 21:22-31). The former term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘ala<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “oath,” properly means “curse.” At times the two terms are used together (Nm 5:21; Neh 10:29; Dn 9:11). Any breach of one’s undertaking affirmed by an oath would be attended by a curse. The Lord affirmed that he had established a covenant and a curse with Israel—that is, a breach of covenant would be followed by a curse (Dt 29:14ff.).<\/p>\n<p>An oath was taken to confirm an agreement or, in a political situation, to confirm a treaty. Both in Israel and among its neighbors, God (or the gods) would act as the guarantor(s) of the agreement and his name (or their names) was invoked for this purpose. When Jacob and Laban made an agreement, they erected a heap of stones as a witness (Gn 31:53). If either party transgressed the terms, it was a heinous sin. For this reason one of the Ten Commandments dealt with empty affirmations: “Do not misuse the name of the <span>Lord<\/span> your God. The <span>Lord<\/span> will not let you go unpunished if you misuse his name” (Ex 20:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people of Israel were forbidden to swear their oaths by false gods (Jer 12:16; Am 8:14). To breach an international treaty, where the oath was taken in the Lord’s name, merited death (Ez 17:16-17). It was one of the complaints of Hosea that the people of his day swore falsely when they made a covenant (Hos 10:4). Judgment would attend such wanton disregard of the solemnity of an oath. Certain civil situations in Israel called for an oath (Ex 22:10-11; Lv 5:1; 6:3; Nm 5:11-28). This practice provided a pattern for the Israelite covenantal oath of allegiance between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>Christ taught that oaths were binding (Mt 5:33). In the kingdom of God oaths would become unnecessary (vv 34-37). At his trial before Caiaphas, Jesus heard an imprecatory oath from the high priest (26:63-65), and Paul swore by an oath on occasion (2 Cor 1:23; Gal 1:20). God himself was bound by his own oath (Heb 6:13-18) to keep his promise to the patriarchs (Gn 50:24; Pss 89:19-37, 49; 110:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant; Vows.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OATH<\/h3>\n<p>Solemn vow or promise to fulfill a pledge. There are two terms in Hebrew that mean “oath”: <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘ala<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sebu’a<\/span><em>.<\/em> The latter, more general term in ancient times meant to enter into a solemn (even magical) relationship with the number seven, although ancient connections are lost. Even so, when Abraham and Abimelech entered into an oath at Beersheba (the well of seven, or the well of the oath), Abraham set aside seven ewe lambs as a witness to the fact that he had dug a well (Gn 21:22-31). The former term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘ala<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “oath,” properly means “curse.” At times the two terms are used together (Nm 5:21; Neh 10:29; Dn 9:11). Any breach of one’s undertaking affirmed by an oath would be attended by a curse. The Lord affirmed that he had established a covenant and a curse with Israel—that is, a breach of covenant would be followed by a curse (Dt 29:14ff.).<\/p>\n<p>An oath was taken to confirm an agreement or, in a political situation, to confirm a treaty. Both in Israel and among its neighbors, God (or the gods) would act as the guarantor(s) of the agreement and his name (or their names) was invoked for this purpose. When Jacob and Laban made an agreement, they erected a heap of stones as a witness (Gn 31:53). If either party transgressed the terms, it was a heinous sin. For this reason one of the Ten Commandments dealt with empty affirmations: “Do not misuse the name of the <span>Lord<\/span> your God. The <span>Lord<\/span> will not let you go unpunished if you misuse his name” (Ex 20:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people of Israel were forbidden to swear their oaths by false gods (Jer 12:16; Am 8:14). To breach an international treaty, where the oath was taken in the Lord’s name, merited death (Ez 17:16-17). It was one of the complaints of Hosea that the people of his day swore falsely when they made a covenant (Hos 10:4). Judgment would attend such wanton disregard of the solemnity of an oath. Certain civil situations in Israel called for an oath (Ex 22:10-11; Lv 5:1; 6:3; Nm 5:11-28). This practice provided a pattern for the Israelite covenantal oath of allegiance between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>Christ taught that oaths were binding (Mt 5:33). In the kingdom of God oaths would become unnecessary (vv 34-37). At his trial before Caiaphas, Jesus heard an imprecatory oath from the high priest (26:63-65), and Paul swore by an oath on occasion (2 Cor 1:23; Gal 1:20). God himself was bound by his own oath (Heb 6:13-18) to keep his promise to the patriarchs (Gn 50:24; Pss 89:19-37, 49; 110:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant; Vows.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OATH Solemn vow or promise to fulfill a pledge. There are two terms in Hebrew that mean “oath”: ‘ala and sebu’a. The latter, more general term in ancient times meant to enter into a solemn (even magical) relationship with the number seven, although ancient connections are lost. Even so, when Abraham and Abimelech entered into an oath at Beersheba (the well of seven, or the well of the oath), Abraham set aside seven ewe lambs as a witness to the fact that he had dug a well (Gn 21:22-31). The f...","summary_en":"OATH Solemn vow or promise to fulfill a pledge. There are two terms in Hebrew that mean “oath”: ‘ala and sebu’a. The latter, more general term in ancient times meant to enter into a solemn (even magical) relationship with the number seven, although ancient connections are lost. Even so, when Abraham and Abimelech entered into an oath at Beersheba (the well of seven, or the well of the oath), Abraham set aside seven ewe lambs as a witness to the fact that he had dug a well (Gn 21:22-31). The f...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43842,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:7","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:7<\/strong> In Hebrew, one’s <em>name<\/em> connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, <em>misuse<\/em>) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:7<\/strong> In Hebrew, one’s <em>name<\/em> connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, <em>misuse<\/em>) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:7 In Hebrew, one’s name connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, misuse) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).","summary_en":"20:7 In Hebrew, one’s name connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, misuse) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71468,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:7","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:7<\/strong> In Hebrew, one’s <em>name<\/em> connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, <em>misuse<\/em>) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:7<\/strong> In Hebrew, one’s <em>name<\/em> connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, <em>misuse<\/em>) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:7 In Hebrew, one’s name connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, misuse) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).","summary_en":"20:7 In Hebrew, one’s name connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, misuse) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99094,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:7","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:7<\/strong> In Hebrew, one’s <em>name<\/em> connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, <em>misuse<\/em>) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:7<\/strong> In Hebrew, one’s <em>name<\/em> connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, <em>misuse<\/em>) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:7 In Hebrew, one’s name connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, misuse) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).","summary_en":"20:7 In Hebrew, one’s name connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, misuse) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126720,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:7","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:7<\/strong> In Hebrew, one’s <em>name<\/em> connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, <em>misuse<\/em>) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:7<\/strong> In Hebrew, one’s <em>name<\/em> connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, <em>misuse<\/em>) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:7 In Hebrew, one’s name connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, misuse) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).","summary_en":"20:7 In Hebrew, one’s name connotes nature and character (see study note on 3:13-22). To make the name of God empty (NLT, misuse) is to do anything that makes him appear insignificant or worthless. One way to do this is to invoke his name in an oath we do not mean to keep. But there are other, even more significant ways to bring shame on God’s name (see Num 20:12; Amos 2:7; cp. Matt 6:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":7283,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandments, the Ten","title_en":"Commandments, the Ten","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7866,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covenant","title_en":"Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>COVENANT<\/h3>\n<p>Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the OT is developed from Noah to Abraham and reaches its first climax in the covenant formed between God and Israel at Mt Sinai. After King David’s time, the history of the covenant becomes a less prominent theme.<\/p>\n<p>At a low point in covenant history the Bible introduces the prophet Jeremiah’s prophecy of a “new covenant” in Israel’s future. Christians believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy eventually found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is not accidental that the two volumes of the Christian Bible have been called the Old Covenant and New Covenant (the word commonly translated “testament” means “covenant”).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<p>• The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>• The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningofCovenant\">The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The essence of covenant is to be found in a particular kind of relationship between persons. Mutual obligations characterize that kind of relationship. Thus a covenant relationship is not merely a mutual acquaintance but a commitment to responsibility and action. A key word in Scripture to describe that commitment is “faithfulness,” acted out in a context of abiding friendship.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the word “covenant” was used in an ordinary human sense as well as in a theological sense. An understanding of human covenants provides a starting point for understanding the covenant between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HumanCovenants\">Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>A variety of human relationships, from profoundly personal to distantly political, may be described as covenantal. The deep brotherly love that David and Jonathan shared led to a formal covenant between them (1 Sm 18:3). Their covenant of friendship was more than a token of esteem; it bound them to demonstrate mutual loyalty and loving-kindness in certain tangible ways. Jonathan’s covenant faithfulness was typified on an occasion when David was out of favor with the king; Jonathan braved his father’s wrath to speak favorably for his friend. Subsequently, he warned David secretly to flee into hiding (1 Sm 19–20).<\/p>\n<p>To appreciate the many OT laws on marriage and divorce, one must understand that marriage itself was a covenant relationship (Mal 2:14). The solemn promises exchanged by a man and woman became their covenant obligations. Faithfulness to those promises brought marital blessing (cf. Ps 128; Prv 18:22); violation brought a curse.<\/p>\n<p>An individual could, at least figuratively, make a covenant or vow with himself or herself (something like a New Year’s resolution). Job, arguing his integrity before God, referred to a covenant he had made with his eyes to keep him from looking at women licentiously (Jb 31:1).<\/p>\n<p>Covenants could also have a national or international character. The elders of Israel made a national covenant with King David in Hebron (2 Sm 5:3). Probably it contained explicit promises both from the elders on behalf of the people to submit themselves to the king’s authority and from David to rule the nation justly and according to the law of God (Dt 17:15-20). The covenant relationship described mutual obligations between a senior partner (the king) and junior partners (the Israelites). In international relationships OT covenants were similar to modern treaties or alliances. King Solomon entered into such a covenant with Hiram, king of Tyre; that covenant, like many modern international treaties, was a trade agreement between the two nations (1 Kgs 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is thus an interpersonal framework of trust, responsibilities, and benefits, with broad application to almost every human relationship from personal friendship to international trade agreements. In Scripture covenant is also the most comprehensive concept covering an individual’s relationship to God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Divine-HumanCovenants\">Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>The same basic characteristics of a strictly human covenant are present in a divine covenant: (1) a relationship between two parties (God and a human being or nation), and (2) mutual obligations between the covenant partners. To the OT believer, religion meant covenant. OT religion was faithfulness to the covenant relationship between God and his chosen people; religious responsibilities for both the faith and practice of Israel were covenant responsibilities.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of a divine-human covenant in the OT was not static. Although the fundamental character of covenant remains the same throughout the Bible, the specific nature and form of the covenant changed and developed in the course of ancient Israel’s history. A brief survey of covenant history will further clarify its dimensions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BeginningsoftheCovenantTradition\">Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<h5>Adam<\/h5>\n<p>Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden. God was their Creator; they were his creatures. The meaning of their lives was to be found in relationship with each other and with God, the giver of the Garden. The fall, however, brought a disruption of the divine relationship, and they were expelled from the Garden.<\/p>\n<p>The fall substantially influenced the nature of subsequent religious covenants. The separation of humankind from God clarifies the nature of the human predicament. Created for a relationship with the Creator, sinning humans are excluded from that relationship and cannot, on their own accord, reestablish it. From that circumstance emerges a distinctive feature of divine-human covenants, namely, that God alone can initiate the relationship of covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>Noah<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit mention of covenant in Scripture refers to the initiative taken by God to bind himself again to human beings in a covenant, despite human faithlessness. When God warned Noah to build an ark in order to escape the impending Flood, he also promised to establish a covenant with him (Gn 6:18). The corruption and violence of the human race had provoked God’s anger, but his grace was shown in his dealings with Noah. The promised covenant provided that God would maintain a relationship with one family, even though other divine-human relationships were being formally severed. Significantly, God’s covenant promise to Noah came in a context of demand: God ordered Noah to build an ark (v 14). Noah’s receipt of the covenant blessing depended on his obedience to a divine command.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant was elaborated only after the Flood, when Noah had made an offering to God (Gn 8:20-22). The covenant with Noah was in fact a universal covenant with humankind and all living creatures (9:8-10). God promised never to send such a flood again as judgment on the world. The sign of that covenant was the rainbow.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant with Noah affords some perspective for understanding the “covenant God.” Although human beings may deserve destruction because of their wickedness, God withholds that destruction. The covenant of Noah did not establish an intimate relationship between God and each living being; nevertheless, it left open the possibility of a more intimate covenant. Human beings, in spite of their evil, are allowed for a time to live in God’s world; during those years, they may seek a deeper relationship with that world’s Creator.<\/p>\n<h5>Abraham<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit reference to God’s covenant with Abraham is in Genesis 15. When the Lord called the 75-year-old Abram (as he was first called) to leave his home city of Ur and set out on a journey, a relationship already existed between God and Abram. In that relationship, which enabled God to command Abram’s obedience, God made certain promises to him: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gn 12:2, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Formal establishment of the covenant with Abram is described in Genesis 15 as a profound religious experience. The initiative lay entirely with God, who approached Abram in a vision and spoke with him. Abram raised a fundamental objection: how could he experience the blessing of God if it was to come to him through a son he did not have? His wife Sarai was past the childbearing age, and he himself was “as good as dead” (Rom 4:19). God assured the old man that he would have a son through whom his descendants would eventually be as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abram’s belief at that point introduced the theme of righteousness central to the covenant concept: Abram “believed the <span>Lord<\/span>, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). At the end of that day, Abram knew that his own future and the future of his descendants were firmly in the hands of the covenant God. “On that day the <span>Lord<\/span> made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I give this land’ ” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The covenant is more fully expressed in Genesis 17, which probably records a renewal of God’s covenant with Abram. The initiative once again lay with God (Gn 17:1). God addressed the 99-year-old Abram in words that made clear that the covenant was not a relationship between equal partners. God was the Almighty; Abram was a human being to whom an extraordinary privilege had been granted.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the details of the covenant in Genesis 17 show that both partners assumed responsibilities. God committed himself voluntarily to Abram and his descendants while requiring certain commitments from Abram. The blessing Abram would receive as a covenant partner became clear from the new name God gave him. “I am changing your name. It will no longer be Abram; now you will be known as Abraham, for you will be the father of many nations” (Gn 17:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). God would give to Abraham, through his descendants, the land of Canaan as an everlasting gift and would be the personal God of Abraham and his family in perpetuity (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<p>God’s giving required a response of obedience from Abraham: “Live a blameless life” (Gn 17:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Those simple words indicate the essence of covenant relationship: to relate to God is to live in his presence; since God is holy, one who knows him is expected to live a life of integrity and blamelessness.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant also had a more formal aspect. Abraham and the male members of his household were to undergo the rite of circumcision as a symbol of covenant commitment. Abraham was an old man when he was circumcised (Gn 17:24), though male children born into the covenant family were to be circumcised when they were eight days old (v 12). Circumcision was not in itself a ritual peculiar to the Hebrews; it was practiced in most societies in the ancient Near East (the Philistines were one exception). The distinctiveness lay in what the act symbolized: among other things, a continuing and faithful relationship with the living God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Abraham was characterized by both present and future realities. The covenant established a continuing relationship between Abraham and his Creator. Yet its thrust pointed to future blessing—in the children yet to be born, the “chosen people,” and in the land that eventually his descendants would call their own.<\/p>\n<p>Another dimension of the covenant lay still further in the future: “All the families of the earth will be blessed through you” (Gn 12:3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Early in the OT, the idea of election (God’s unconditional preference; cf. 2 Thes 2:13) is present. God chose to enter into a covenant relationship with a particular man and his particular descendants. Yet God always elects a person to serve: Adam, to cultivate the Garden; Noah, to build an ark; Abraham, to leave his home for another land and to live blamelessly before God (cf. Eph 2:8-10). Further, the “particularity” of Abraham’s election contained within it a universality: through his descendants the blessing of God would be offered to all.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, the future aspects of Abraham’s covenant reflect two stages. From Abraham’s perspective, in the relatively near future his descendants would possess a land given them by God. But in the more distant future was the prospect of a universal blessing, the culmination of God’s work in the world. The initial fulfillment of that distant future is perceived in the NT, but the more immediate fulfillment of God’s promise was the Sinai covenant at the time of Moses.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSinaiCovenant\">The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The covenant established between God and Israel at Mt Sinai is the focal point of the covenant tradition in the OT. It was anticipated in the covenant of Abraham and lay behind the covenant of David and the proclamation of the prophets. It was central to OT religion, laying down the foundations of Judaism that continue into the modern world. The Sinai covenant was the formal institution of a relationship between God and his chosen people, Israel.<\/p>\n<p>In order to appreciate the impact of the Sinai covenant, one must understand its historical context. It was preceded by the exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. The exodus was an extraordinary act of liberation in which God intervened in the normal course of history to free his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus is interpreted in the OT as a divine act comparable to Creation, the act through which God “created” the nation of Israel. Examination of the two versions of the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15) shows that the exodus from Egypt directly parallels the creation of the world as a basis for Sabbath observance. Although Israel was created in the exodus, the nation had neither a constitution nor land. The covenant provided the nascent state of Israel with a constitution, making it a theocratic state (a state ruled by God).<\/p>\n<p>The basic account of the Sinai covenant is contained in Exodus 19 and 20. The initiative came from God, who gave instructions through Moses to prepare for the covenant; God spoke the words that contained the covenant offer. There was no doubt that the God of Israel was the senior partner in the relationship made formal at Sinai. The God who had revealed himself through his acts in the exodus then revealed himself in words. Those two aspects—the God who acts and speaks—are central to OT theology. And although the covenant contained law, it was preceded by the exodus, an act of divine grace.<\/p>\n<p>God’s offer of covenant carried with it a divine promise: “You will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). The promise was one of extraordinary privilege; an entire nation was called upon to represent all other nations before the God of the universe. But the priestly office, though it carried privilege, was also a demanding office. A priest had to be pure and had to know the God whose presence he was required to enter. Thus Israel, the priestly nation, received a law that would provide direction in living, in loving God, and in serving all people. The law given with the covenant expressed the requirements for God’s covenant people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Covenant Law<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant law had two principal parts. First, the Ten Commandments expressed God’s requirements of Israel in a concise form (Ex 20:2-17). The commandments specified the covenant people’s relationship both to God and to other human beings. Although the tendency in the present day is to view the Ten Commandments as a system of ethics or morality, they had a different role in ancient Israel. The covenant law was the foundation or constitution of a new nation, a special “nation of priests.” The head of the nation-state was God. Hence, in ancient Israel the status of the Ten Commandments was approximately that of the code of criminal law in a modern nation-state. To break one of those laws was to commit a crime against God, the head of the state. Yet the laws had a positive purpose. They set down a way of life that would result in a full and rich communion with God and community with others.<\/p>\n<p>The second part of the covenant law was a detailed law code covering the activities of everyday life. Examples of such laws are found in Exodus 21–23. These laws were compiled and recorded in the “Book of the Covenant” (Ex 24:7). Although many laws were contained in this book, it was impossible to codify every aspect of human behavior. The diversity of the examples given indicates that for the covenant member no area of human life was beyond the influence of the covenant. Persons who entered into a relationship with God entered into a relationship that impinged on every possible aspect of their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Renewal<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant at Sinai was made with a particular group of people under the leadership of Moses but was binding on future generations. Consequently, the covenant was renewed from time to time. Covenant renewals are recorded in the time of Joshua (Jos 8:30-35; 24:1-28) and, much later, during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>The most important passage in the Bible for understanding covenant renewal and the nature of covenant is the book of Deuteronomy. The entire book describes a particular covenant renewal ceremony that occurred at a critical juncture in Israel’s early history. The Sinai covenant was renewed just before Moses’ death, before the transition of leadership to Joshua, and before a major military campaign to possess the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant since the time of Abraham had contained a promise of land. Immediately before they entered that land (c. 1250 <span>BC<\/span>), the covenant vows were renewed with a new generation of Israelites, most of whom had not stood at the foot of Mt Sinai some 40 years earlier. Although covenant renewal is the central theme of Deuteronomy, the writer focused primarily on Moses’ sermon rather than on a detailed account of the renewal ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ceremony were simply a repetition of what happened at the original ratification of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were repeated (Dt 5:6-21), and the laws of the Book of the Covenant were expounded in greater detail (Dt 12–26). Two points emerging in Deuteronomy are particularly significant for an understanding of covenant: a clear statement of covenant love and a detailed statement of the blessings and curses that accompanied the making and renewing of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCovenantwithDavid\">The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>The covenant tradition underwent modification during the time of King David (c. 1000 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sinai covenant had been established between God and Israel, with Moses acting as mediator. In David’s time an additional element was added: God entered into a covenant with David as king. That royal covenant was intimated to David through the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:8-16), indicating once again the divine initiative. It was to be an everlasting covenant with David’s royal lineage (23:5).<\/p>\n\n<p>Christians generally interpret the covenant with David as a messianic covenant. For several centuries the dynasty established by David ruled a united Israel, then ruled the remaining southern kingdom of Judah. But in 586 <span>BC<\/span> Judah was conquered by the Babylonians. At that point a descendant of David was no longer ruling an independent kingdom of God’s chosen people. The everlasting nature of the covenant with David was brought out, however, not in the pages of ancient history but in the expectation of a Messiah who would be born of David’s descendants. Matthew and Luke both pointed to Jesus’ Davidic descent (Mt 1:1; Lk 3:31). The NT thus extends the covenant acts of God into the new age in the person of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNewCovenantPredictedintheOldTestament\">The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although David’s covenant with God was eternal, in a sense the covenant established with Israel on Mt Sinai was temporal. The Sinai covenant included conditional clauses, stated in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy. Israel’s disobedience of the covenant law would at worst bring exile from the Promised Land, a central covenant theme from Abraham to Moses and beyond.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew prophets often perceived the danger of an end to the covenant as a result of Israel’s sins. Some of the prophets, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, also perceived a deeper truth; namely, that the covenant was rooted in divine love and that therefore even the curse of God could not be final.<\/p>\n<p>Hosea dramatically expressed that truth through the “living parable” of his marriage (Hos 1–3). He married Gomer at God’s command, but later, as a result of her unfaithfulness, the marital covenant was dissolved by divorce. Although Gomer’s adulterous acts compelled Hosea to divorce her, he did not cease to love her. God later commanded Hosea to go back to Gomer (Hos 3:1). Despite her unfaithfulness, the prophet was to take her again into the covenant relationship of marriage. That acted-out parable depicted God’s actions with Israel. Israel’s sin would inevitably culminate in a divorce from God, but Hosea perceived a new marriage. In the new covenant between God and Israel, Israel would be graciously accepted back into a relationship with God (2:14-18).<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant is given powerful expression in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In his lifetime Jeremiah saw the kingdom of Judah defeated in war. The nation lost its independence and became a vassal of the Babylonian Empire. In an external sense, that defeat in 586 <span>BC<\/span> marked the end of the Sinai covenant. Israel could no longer call the Promised Land its own. Yet Jeremiah perceived a truth beyond the contemporary political realities. God’s work in the world, like his love for the world, was not over.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant that God would bring into effect: “The days are coming, says the <span>Lord<\/span>, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The new covenant would be marked by an act of God within human hearts, a radical spiritual transformation (Jer 31:34). At the Last Supper Jesus declared to his disciples that “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). To the writer of Hebrews, the new covenant was central to a full understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ (Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is a concept central to the message and the history of the OT. The covenant theme continues into the NT as a way of interpreting the Christian gospel. Meaning in human life is to be found in a covenant relationship with the living God. Yet sinful human beings cannot work their way into such a relationship; God alone can initiate it. According to the NT, God’s act in giving his son, Jesus, to die opened up the covenant relationship to all human beings. The forgiveness made available by Jesus’ “blood of the new covenant” makes it possible for any individual to enter into a covenant relationship with God. Entry into such a relationship, today as in Abraham’s time, hinges upon faith (Gal 3:6-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Alliance; Covenant, The New; Law, Biblical Concept of; Oath; Vows.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVENANT<\/h3>\n<p>Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant theme in the OT is developed from Noah to Abraham and reaches its first climax in the covenant formed between God and Israel at Mt Sinai. After King David’s time, the history of the covenant becomes a less prominent theme.<\/p>\n<p>At a low point in covenant history the Bible introduces the prophet Jeremiah’s prophecy of a “new covenant” in Israel’s future. Christians believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy eventually found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is not accidental that the two volumes of the Christian Bible have been called the Old Covenant and New Covenant (the word commonly translated “testament” means “covenant”).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>• Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<p>• The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>• The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>• The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningofCovenant\">The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The essence of covenant is to be found in a particular kind of relationship between persons. Mutual obligations characterize that kind of relationship. Thus a covenant relationship is not merely a mutual acquaintance but a commitment to responsibility and action. A key word in Scripture to describe that commitment is “faithfulness,” acted out in a context of abiding friendship.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the word “covenant” was used in an ordinary human sense as well as in a theological sense. An understanding of human covenants provides a starting point for understanding the covenant between God and human beings.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HumanCovenants\">Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>A variety of human relationships, from profoundly personal to distantly political, may be described as covenantal. The deep brotherly love that David and Jonathan shared led to a formal covenant between them (1 Sm 18:3). Their covenant of friendship was more than a token of esteem; it bound them to demonstrate mutual loyalty and loving-kindness in certain tangible ways. Jonathan’s covenant faithfulness was typified on an occasion when David was out of favor with the king; Jonathan braved his father’s wrath to speak favorably for his friend. Subsequently, he warned David secretly to flee into hiding (1 Sm 19–20).<\/p>\n<p>To appreciate the many OT laws on marriage and divorce, one must understand that marriage itself was a covenant relationship (Mal 2:14). The solemn promises exchanged by a man and woman became their covenant obligations. Faithfulness to those promises brought marital blessing (cf. Ps 128; Prv 18:22); violation brought a curse.<\/p>\n<p>An individual could, at least figuratively, make a covenant or vow with himself or herself (something like a New Year’s resolution). Job, arguing his integrity before God, referred to a covenant he had made with his eyes to keep him from looking at women licentiously (Jb 31:1).<\/p>\n<p>Covenants could also have a national or international character. The elders of Israel made a national covenant with King David in Hebron (2 Sm 5:3). Probably it contained explicit promises both from the elders on behalf of the people to submit themselves to the king’s authority and from David to rule the nation justly and according to the law of God (Dt 17:15-20). The covenant relationship described mutual obligations between a senior partner (the king) and junior partners (the Israelites). In international relationships OT covenants were similar to modern treaties or alliances. King Solomon entered into such a covenant with Hiram, king of Tyre; that covenant, like many modern international treaties, was a trade agreement between the two nations (1 Kgs 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is thus an interpersonal framework of trust, responsibilities, and benefits, with broad application to almost every human relationship from personal friendship to international trade agreements. In Scripture covenant is also the most comprehensive concept covering an individual’s relationship to God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Divine-HumanCovenants\">Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n<p>The same basic characteristics of a strictly human covenant are present in a divine covenant: (1) a relationship between two parties (God and a human being or nation), and (2) mutual obligations between the covenant partners. To the OT believer, religion meant covenant. OT religion was faithfulness to the covenant relationship between God and his chosen people; religious responsibilities for both the faith and practice of Israel were covenant responsibilities.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of a divine-human covenant in the OT was not static. Although the fundamental character of covenant remains the same throughout the Bible, the specific nature and form of the covenant changed and developed in the course of ancient Israel’s history. A brief survey of covenant history will further clarify its dimensions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BeginningsoftheCovenantTradition\">Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<h5>Adam<\/h5>\n<p>Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden. God was their Creator; they were his creatures. The meaning of their lives was to be found in relationship with each other and with God, the giver of the Garden. The fall, however, brought a disruption of the divine relationship, and they were expelled from the Garden.<\/p>\n<p>The fall substantially influenced the nature of subsequent religious covenants. The separation of humankind from God clarifies the nature of the human predicament. Created for a relationship with the Creator, sinning humans are excluded from that relationship and cannot, on their own accord, reestablish it. From that circumstance emerges a distinctive feature of divine-human covenants, namely, that God alone can initiate the relationship of covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>Noah<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit mention of covenant in Scripture refers to the initiative taken by God to bind himself again to human beings in a covenant, despite human faithlessness. When God warned Noah to build an ark in order to escape the impending Flood, he also promised to establish a covenant with him (Gn 6:18). The corruption and violence of the human race had provoked God’s anger, but his grace was shown in his dealings with Noah. The promised covenant provided that God would maintain a relationship with one family, even though other divine-human relationships were being formally severed. Significantly, God’s covenant promise to Noah came in a context of demand: God ordered Noah to build an ark (v 14). Noah’s receipt of the covenant blessing depended on his obedience to a divine command.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant was elaborated only after the Flood, when Noah had made an offering to God (Gn 8:20-22). The covenant with Noah was in fact a universal covenant with humankind and all living creatures (9:8-10). God promised never to send such a flood again as judgment on the world. The sign of that covenant was the rainbow.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant with Noah affords some perspective for understanding the “covenant God.” Although human beings may deserve destruction because of their wickedness, God withholds that destruction. The covenant of Noah did not establish an intimate relationship between God and each living being; nevertheless, it left open the possibility of a more intimate covenant. Human beings, in spite of their evil, are allowed for a time to live in God’s world; during those years, they may seek a deeper relationship with that world’s Creator.<\/p>\n<h5>Abraham<\/h5>\n<p>The first explicit reference to God’s covenant with Abraham is in Genesis 15. When the Lord called the 75-year-old Abram (as he was first called) to leave his home city of Ur and set out on a journey, a relationship already existed between God and Abram. In that relationship, which enabled God to command Abram’s obedience, God made certain promises to him: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gn 12:2, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Formal establishment of the covenant with Abram is described in Genesis 15 as a profound religious experience. The initiative lay entirely with God, who approached Abram in a vision and spoke with him. Abram raised a fundamental objection: how could he experience the blessing of God if it was to come to him through a son he did not have? His wife Sarai was past the childbearing age, and he himself was “as good as dead” (Rom 4:19). God assured the old man that he would have a son through whom his descendants would eventually be as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abram’s belief at that point introduced the theme of righteousness central to the covenant concept: Abram “believed the <span>Lord<\/span>, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). At the end of that day, Abram knew that his own future and the future of his descendants were firmly in the hands of the covenant God. “On that day the <span>Lord<\/span> made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I give this land’ ” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The covenant is more fully expressed in Genesis 17, which probably records a renewal of God’s covenant with Abram. The initiative once again lay with God (Gn 17:1). God addressed the 99-year-old Abram in words that made clear that the covenant was not a relationship between equal partners. God was the Almighty; Abram was a human being to whom an extraordinary privilege had been granted.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the details of the covenant in Genesis 17 show that both partners assumed responsibilities. God committed himself voluntarily to Abram and his descendants while requiring certain commitments from Abram. The blessing Abram would receive as a covenant partner became clear from the new name God gave him. “I am changing your name. It will no longer be Abram; now you will be known as Abraham, for you will be the father of many nations” (Gn 17:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). God would give to Abraham, through his descendants, the land of Canaan as an everlasting gift and would be the personal God of Abraham and his family in perpetuity (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<p>God’s giving required a response of obedience from Abraham: “Live a blameless life” (Gn 17:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Those simple words indicate the essence of covenant relationship: to relate to God is to live in his presence; since God is holy, one who knows him is expected to live a life of integrity and blamelessness.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant also had a more formal aspect. Abraham and the male members of his household were to undergo the rite of circumcision as a symbol of covenant commitment. Abraham was an old man when he was circumcised (Gn 17:24), though male children born into the covenant family were to be circumcised when they were eight days old (v 12). Circumcision was not in itself a ritual peculiar to the Hebrews; it was practiced in most societies in the ancient Near East (the Philistines were one exception). The distinctiveness lay in what the act symbolized: among other things, a continuing and faithful relationship with the living God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s covenant with Abraham was characterized by both present and future realities. The covenant established a continuing relationship between Abraham and his Creator. Yet its thrust pointed to future blessing—in the children yet to be born, the “chosen people,” and in the land that eventually his descendants would call their own.<\/p>\n<p>Another dimension of the covenant lay still further in the future: “All the families of the earth will be blessed through you” (Gn 12:3, <span>nlt<\/span>). Early in the OT, the idea of election (God’s unconditional preference; cf. 2 Thes 2:13) is present. God chose to enter into a covenant relationship with a particular man and his particular descendants. Yet God always elects a person to serve: Adam, to cultivate the Garden; Noah, to build an ark; Abraham, to leave his home for another land and to live blamelessly before God (cf. Eph 2:8-10). Further, the “particularity” of Abraham’s election contained within it a universality: through his descendants the blessing of God would be offered to all.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, the future aspects of Abraham’s covenant reflect two stages. From Abraham’s perspective, in the relatively near future his descendants would possess a land given them by God. But in the more distant future was the prospect of a universal blessing, the culmination of God’s work in the world. The initial fulfillment of that distant future is perceived in the NT, but the more immediate fulfillment of God’s promise was the Sinai covenant at the time of Moses.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSinaiCovenant\">The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n<p>The covenant established between God and Israel at Mt Sinai is the focal point of the covenant tradition in the OT. It was anticipated in the covenant of Abraham and lay behind the covenant of David and the proclamation of the prophets. It was central to OT religion, laying down the foundations of Judaism that continue into the modern world. The Sinai covenant was the formal institution of a relationship between God and his chosen people, Israel.<\/p>\n<p>In order to appreciate the impact of the Sinai covenant, one must understand its historical context. It was preceded by the exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. The exodus was an extraordinary act of liberation in which God intervened in the normal course of history to free his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus is interpreted in the OT as a divine act comparable to Creation, the act through which God “created” the nation of Israel. Examination of the two versions of the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15) shows that the exodus from Egypt directly parallels the creation of the world as a basis for Sabbath observance. Although Israel was created in the exodus, the nation had neither a constitution nor land. The covenant provided the nascent state of Israel with a constitution, making it a theocratic state (a state ruled by God).<\/p>\n<p>The basic account of the Sinai covenant is contained in Exodus 19 and 20. The initiative came from God, who gave instructions through Moses to prepare for the covenant; God spoke the words that contained the covenant offer. There was no doubt that the God of Israel was the senior partner in the relationship made formal at Sinai. The God who had revealed himself through his acts in the exodus then revealed himself in words. Those two aspects—the God who acts and speaks—are central to OT theology. And although the covenant contained law, it was preceded by the exodus, an act of divine grace.<\/p>\n<p>God’s offer of covenant carried with it a divine promise: “You will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). The promise was one of extraordinary privilege; an entire nation was called upon to represent all other nations before the God of the universe. But the priestly office, though it carried privilege, was also a demanding office. A priest had to be pure and had to know the God whose presence he was required to enter. Thus Israel, the priestly nation, received a law that would provide direction in living, in loving God, and in serving all people. The law given with the covenant expressed the requirements for God’s covenant people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Covenant Law<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant law had two principal parts. First, the Ten Commandments expressed God’s requirements of Israel in a concise form (Ex 20:2-17). The commandments specified the covenant people’s relationship both to God and to other human beings. Although the tendency in the present day is to view the Ten Commandments as a system of ethics or morality, they had a different role in ancient Israel. The covenant law was the foundation or constitution of a new nation, a special “nation of priests.” The head of the nation-state was God. Hence, in ancient Israel the status of the Ten Commandments was approximately that of the code of criminal law in a modern nation-state. To break one of those laws was to commit a crime against God, the head of the state. Yet the laws had a positive purpose. They set down a way of life that would result in a full and rich communion with God and community with others.<\/p>\n<p>The second part of the covenant law was a detailed law code covering the activities of everyday life. Examples of such laws are found in Exodus 21–23. These laws were compiled and recorded in the “Book of the Covenant” (Ex 24:7). Although many laws were contained in this book, it was impossible to codify every aspect of human behavior. The diversity of the examples given indicates that for the covenant member no area of human life was beyond the influence of the covenant. Persons who entered into a relationship with God entered into a relationship that impinged on every possible aspect of their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Renewal<\/h5>\n<p>The covenant at Sinai was made with a particular group of people under the leadership of Moses but was binding on future generations. Consequently, the covenant was renewed from time to time. Covenant renewals are recorded in the time of Joshua (Jos 8:30-35; 24:1-28) and, much later, during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>The most important passage in the Bible for understanding covenant renewal and the nature of covenant is the book of Deuteronomy. The entire book describes a particular covenant renewal ceremony that occurred at a critical juncture in Israel’s early history. The Sinai covenant was renewed just before Moses’ death, before the transition of leadership to Joshua, and before a major military campaign to possess the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The covenant since the time of Abraham had contained a promise of land. Immediately before they entered that land (c. 1250 <span>BC<\/span>), the covenant vows were renewed with a new generation of Israelites, most of whom had not stood at the foot of Mt Sinai some 40 years earlier. Although covenant renewal is the central theme of Deuteronomy, the writer focused primarily on Moses’ sermon rather than on a detailed account of the renewal ceremony.<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ceremony were simply a repetition of what happened at the original ratification of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were repeated (Dt 5:6-21), and the laws of the Book of the Covenant were expounded in greater detail (Dt 12–26). Two points emerging in Deuteronomy are particularly significant for an understanding of covenant: a clear statement of covenant love and a detailed statement of the blessings and curses that accompanied the making and renewing of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCovenantwithDavid\">The Covenant with David<\/p>\n<p>The covenant tradition underwent modification during the time of King David (c. 1000 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sinai covenant had been established between God and Israel, with Moses acting as mediator. In David’s time an additional element was added: God entered into a covenant with David as king. That royal covenant was intimated to David through the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:8-16), indicating once again the divine initiative. It was to be an everlasting covenant with David’s royal lineage (23:5).<\/p>\n\n<p>Christians generally interpret the covenant with David as a messianic covenant. For several centuries the dynasty established by David ruled a united Israel, then ruled the remaining southern kingdom of Judah. But in 586 <span>BC<\/span> Judah was conquered by the Babylonians. At that point a descendant of David was no longer ruling an independent kingdom of God’s chosen people. The everlasting nature of the covenant with David was brought out, however, not in the pages of ancient history but in the expectation of a Messiah who would be born of David’s descendants. Matthew and Luke both pointed to Jesus’ Davidic descent (Mt 1:1; Lk 3:31). The NT thus extends the covenant acts of God into the new age in the person of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNewCovenantPredictedintheOldTestament\">The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although David’s covenant with God was eternal, in a sense the covenant established with Israel on Mt Sinai was temporal. The Sinai covenant included conditional clauses, stated in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy. Israel’s disobedience of the covenant law would at worst bring exile from the Promised Land, a central covenant theme from Abraham to Moses and beyond.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew prophets often perceived the danger of an end to the covenant as a result of Israel’s sins. Some of the prophets, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, also perceived a deeper truth; namely, that the covenant was rooted in divine love and that therefore even the curse of God could not be final.<\/p>\n<p>Hosea dramatically expressed that truth through the “living parable” of his marriage (Hos 1–3). He married Gomer at God’s command, but later, as a result of her unfaithfulness, the marital covenant was dissolved by divorce. Although Gomer’s adulterous acts compelled Hosea to divorce her, he did not cease to love her. God later commanded Hosea to go back to Gomer (Hos 3:1). Despite her unfaithfulness, the prophet was to take her again into the covenant relationship of marriage. That acted-out parable depicted God’s actions with Israel. Israel’s sin would inevitably culminate in a divorce from God, but Hosea perceived a new marriage. In the new covenant between God and Israel, Israel would be graciously accepted back into a relationship with God (2:14-18).<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant is given powerful expression in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries <span>BC<\/span>. In his lifetime Jeremiah saw the kingdom of Judah defeated in war. The nation lost its independence and became a vassal of the Babylonian Empire. In an external sense, that defeat in 586 <span>BC<\/span> marked the end of the Sinai covenant. Israel could no longer call the Promised Land its own. Yet Jeremiah perceived a truth beyond the contemporary political realities. God’s work in the world, like his love for the world, was not over.<\/p>\n<p>Thus Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant that God would bring into effect: “The days are coming, says the <span>Lord<\/span>, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The new covenant would be marked by an act of God within human hearts, a radical spiritual transformation (Jer 31:34). At the Last Supper Jesus declared to his disciples that “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). To the writer of Hebrews, the new covenant was central to a full understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ (Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Covenant is a concept central to the message and the history of the OT. The covenant theme continues into the NT as a way of interpreting the Christian gospel. Meaning in human life is to be found in a covenant relationship with the living God. Yet sinful human beings cannot work their way into such a relationship; God alone can initiate it. According to the NT, God’s act in giving his son, Jesus, to die opened up the covenant relationship to all human beings. The forgiveness made available by Jesus’ “blood of the new covenant” makes it possible for any individual to enter into a covenant relationship with God. Entry into such a relationship, today as in Abraham’s time, hinges upon faith (Gal 3:6-14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Alliance; Covenant, The New; Law, Biblical Concept of; Oath; Vows.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVENANT Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings. The covenant theme in the OT is developed from...","summary_en":"COVENANT Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings. The covenant theme in the OT is developed from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8051,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","title_en":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","content_ro":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<p>• Punishment<\/p>\n<p>• Conclusion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NearEasternContext\">Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>In ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\n<p>Conclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewCriminalLaw\">Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\n<p>Since Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Any type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\n<p>Murder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Kidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>Injuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\n<p>Negligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\n<p>In ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\n<p>Adultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>In a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\n<p>Little emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\n<p>The Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\n<p>A number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\n<p>Some Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Sorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Punishment\">Punishment<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Many forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n<p>1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\n<p>Before a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\n<p>In offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\n<p>The Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\n<p>Citizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 <span>BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\n<p>The Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Capital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n<p>1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\n<p>Usually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 <span>BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 <span>BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\n<p>Three types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<p>• Punishment<\/p>\n<p>• Conclusion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NearEasternContext\">Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>In ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\n<p>Conclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewCriminalLaw\">Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\n<p>Since Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Any type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\n<p>Murder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Kidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>Injuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\n<p>Negligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\n<p>In ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\n<p>Adultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>In a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\n<p>Little emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\n<p>The Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\n<p>A number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\n<p>Some Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Sorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Punishment\">Punishment<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Many forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n<p>1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\n<p>Before a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\n<p>In offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\n<p>The Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\n<p>Citizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 <span>BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\n<p>The Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Capital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n<p>1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\n<p>Usually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 <span>BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 <span>BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\n<p>Three types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","summary_en":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8814,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Day","title_en":"Day","content_ro":"<h3>DAY<\/h3>\n<p>Most literally, a period of time delimited by the earth’s rotation around its axis, such as the period between two consecutive sunrises; also, the portion of that period in which the sun is visible, the other portion being called “night.” The word “day” occurs over 2,000 times in the OT, over 350 times in the NT. The Hebrew word for “day” is used in a variety of ways, not merely in the literal sense. The Hebrew day began in the evening and continued until the following evening, a reckoning presumably based on the Torah (cf. Gn 1:14, 19). That kind of literal solar (24-hour) day is known as a civil day. Among other ancient Near Eastern nations the civil day began at different times. Greek custom agreed with that of the Hebrews; the Babylonians started their day at sunrise; the Egyptian and Roman day stretched from one midnight to the next.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalDaysandWeeks\">Biblical Days and Weeks<\/p>\n<p>Commonly recognized units of the visible (12-hour) day were morning, noonday, and evening (Ps 55:17). Those divisions were sometimes defined by terms for dawn (Jb 3:9), the heat of the day (1 Sm 11:11), noon (Gn 43:16), the cool of the day (3:8), and evening (Ru 2:17). The Hebrew phrase “between the two evenings” (Ex 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> mg) probably referred to dusk, the dark part of twilight (Ex 16:12). Division of days into consecutive hours did not take place until the time of Christ. The closest OT approximation to such a unit was the division of the day into quarters (Neh 9:3), perhaps a counterpart of the preexilic division of the night into watches.<\/p>\n<p>The ancient Hebrews did not name the days of the week other than the Sabbath. Rather, they referred to them numerically, a practice carried over into NT times (Lk 24:1). Because of the traditional Hebrew emphasis on the Sabbath, it was important for the Jews to know the exact time when the Sabbath began. The Pharisees therefore decided that the appearance of three stars following sunset would determine the Sabbath day’s beginning.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DaysofCreation\">Days of Creation<\/p>\n<p>Many people believe that the days mentioned in the Genesis Creation narrative were 24-hour periods. The phrase “there was evening, there was morning” is used to support that idea. That expression, however, is actually a Sumerian literary figure that pairs opposites together to describe totality. Thus “evening-morning” means a complete phase of time within the total creative cycle; it emphasizes the completeness or comprehensiveness of the process, not the specific period of time in which that process was accomplished. The totality of Creation, phase by phase, may have been thus depicted without any necessary reference to a defined time period.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Sumerian civil day included only the visible (12-hour) period, a legal day of other nations was actually a “double day” (24 hours). If the early Genesis material reflects Sumerian culture, the use of “evening-morning” would preclude current concepts of a civil day and point instead to a phase or general time period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestament\">Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, “day” frequently has a figurative meaning—for example, the “day of the Lord” (Jl 1:15; Am 5:18), the “day of trouble” (Ps 20:1), and the “day of God’s wrath” (Jb 20:28). The plural form is sometimes used to describe a king’s reign (1 Kgs 10:21) or the extent of an individual’s life (Gn 5:4; 1 Kgs 3:14; Ps 90:12). God is described in the book of Daniel as the “Ancient of Days” (Dn 7:9, 13).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the Sabbath (Gn 2:3; Ex 20:8-11), which was reserved for rest and worship, “day” was applied to the Passover celebration each spring (Ex 12:14; Lv 23:5) and the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:29-31) each autumn. As with the Sabbath, no work was performed on those occasions; prescribed religious rituals were observed.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestament\">New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the use of “day” followed Semitic usage to some extent, although the four military night watches were of Greek and Roman origin. The 12-hour day of NT times was a legacy of Babylonian astronomy (cf. Jn 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the literal usage of “day,” NT authors sometimes employed it figuratively, as in such expressions as the “day of salvation” (2 Cor 6:2) and the “day of Jesus Christ” (Phil 1:6). Or they described specified periods of time, as in the “days of his Temple duties” (Lk 1:23, <span>tlb<\/span>). Special feasts mentioned include the Passover (Jn 12:1), the days of Unleavened Bread (Acts 12:3), and the Day of Pentecost (2:1).<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT, the period of human life is described as days (Jn 9:4). Christians are called “children of the light and of the day” (1 Thes 5:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Longer periods or eras are referred to as days (2 Cor 6:2; Eph 5:16; 6:13; Heb 5:7). The ominous note struck by the Hebrew prophets about a day of judgment is matched by NT stress on a day of final divine judgment when the Son of Man (Jesus) will reveal himself as Lord (Lk 17:30; Jn 6:39-44; 1 Cor 5:5; 1 Thes 5:2; 2 Pt 2:9; 3:7, 12; 1 Jn 4:17; Rv 16:14). The “day of eternity” marks that point at which time will become eternity (2 Pt 3:18, <span>rsv<\/span>). The new Jerusalem, dwelling place of God’s people, is described as a place of perpetual day (Rv 21:25).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Day of the Lord; Eschatology.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DAY<\/h3>\n<p>Most literally, a period of time delimited by the earth’s rotation around its axis, such as the period between two consecutive sunrises; also, the portion of that period in which the sun is visible, the other portion being called “night.” The word “day” occurs over 2,000 times in the OT, over 350 times in the NT. The Hebrew word for “day” is used in a variety of ways, not merely in the literal sense. The Hebrew day began in the evening and continued until the following evening, a reckoning presumably based on the Torah (cf. Gn 1:14, 19). That kind of literal solar (24-hour) day is known as a civil day. Among other ancient Near Eastern nations the civil day began at different times. Greek custom agreed with that of the Hebrews; the Babylonians started their day at sunrise; the Egyptian and Roman day stretched from one midnight to the next.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalDaysandWeeks\">Biblical Days and Weeks<\/p>\n<p>Commonly recognized units of the visible (12-hour) day were morning, noonday, and evening (Ps 55:17). Those divisions were sometimes defined by terms for dawn (Jb 3:9), the heat of the day (1 Sm 11:11), noon (Gn 43:16), the cool of the day (3:8), and evening (Ru 2:17). The Hebrew phrase “between the two evenings” (Ex 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> mg) probably referred to dusk, the dark part of twilight (Ex 16:12). Division of days into consecutive hours did not take place until the time of Christ. The closest OT approximation to such a unit was the division of the day into quarters (Neh 9:3), perhaps a counterpart of the preexilic division of the night into watches.<\/p>\n<p>The ancient Hebrews did not name the days of the week other than the Sabbath. Rather, they referred to them numerically, a practice carried over into NT times (Lk 24:1). Because of the traditional Hebrew emphasis on the Sabbath, it was important for the Jews to know the exact time when the Sabbath began. The Pharisees therefore decided that the appearance of three stars following sunset would determine the Sabbath day’s beginning.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DaysofCreation\">Days of Creation<\/p>\n<p>Many people believe that the days mentioned in the Genesis Creation narrative were 24-hour periods. The phrase “there was evening, there was morning” is used to support that idea. That expression, however, is actually a Sumerian literary figure that pairs opposites together to describe totality. Thus “evening-morning” means a complete phase of time within the total creative cycle; it emphasizes the completeness or comprehensiveness of the process, not the specific period of time in which that process was accomplished. The totality of Creation, phase by phase, may have been thus depicted without any necessary reference to a defined time period.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Sumerian civil day included only the visible (12-hour) period, a legal day of other nations was actually a “double day” (24 hours). If the early Genesis material reflects Sumerian culture, the use of “evening-morning” would preclude current concepts of a civil day and point instead to a phase or general time period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestament\">Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, “day” frequently has a figurative meaning—for example, the “day of the Lord” (Jl 1:15; Am 5:18), the “day of trouble” (Ps 20:1), and the “day of God’s wrath” (Jb 20:28). The plural form is sometimes used to describe a king’s reign (1 Kgs 10:21) or the extent of an individual’s life (Gn 5:4; 1 Kgs 3:14; Ps 90:12). God is described in the book of Daniel as the “Ancient of Days” (Dn 7:9, 13).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the Sabbath (Gn 2:3; Ex 20:8-11), which was reserved for rest and worship, “day” was applied to the Passover celebration each spring (Ex 12:14; Lv 23:5) and the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:29-31) each autumn. As with the Sabbath, no work was performed on those occasions; prescribed religious rituals were observed.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestament\">New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the use of “day” followed Semitic usage to some extent, although the four military night watches were of Greek and Roman origin. The 12-hour day of NT times was a legacy of Babylonian astronomy (cf. Jn 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the literal usage of “day,” NT authors sometimes employed it figuratively, as in such expressions as the “day of salvation” (2 Cor 6:2) and the “day of Jesus Christ” (Phil 1:6). Or they described specified periods of time, as in the “days of his Temple duties” (Lk 1:23, <span>tlb<\/span>). Special feasts mentioned include the Passover (Jn 12:1), the days of Unleavened Bread (Acts 12:3), and the Day of Pentecost (2:1).<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT, the period of human life is described as days (Jn 9:4). Christians are called “children of the light and of the day” (1 Thes 5:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Longer periods or eras are referred to as days (2 Cor 6:2; Eph 5:16; 6:13; Heb 5:7). The ominous note struck by the Hebrew prophets about a day of judgment is matched by NT stress on a day of final divine judgment when the Son of Man (Jesus) will reveal himself as Lord (Lk 17:30; Jn 6:39-44; 1 Cor 5:5; 1 Thes 5:2; 2 Pt 2:9; 3:7, 12; 1 Jn 4:17; Rv 16:14). The “day of eternity” marks that point at which time will become eternity (2 Pt 3:18, <span>rsv<\/span>). The new Jerusalem, dwelling place of God’s people, is described as a place of perpetual day (Rv 21:25).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Day of the Lord; Eschatology.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DAY Most literally, a period of time delimited by the earth’s rotation around its axis, such as the period between two consecutive sunrises; also, the portion of that period in which the sun is visible, the other portion being called “night.” The word “day” occurs over 2,000 times in the OT, over 350 times in the NT. The Hebrew word for “day” is used in a variety of ways, not merely in the literal sense. The Hebrew day began in the evening and continued until the following evening, a reckonin...","summary_en":"DAY Most literally, a period of time delimited by the earth’s rotation around its axis, such as the period between two consecutive sunrises; also, the portion of that period in which the sun is visible, the other portion being called “night.” The word “day” occurs over 2,000 times in the OT, over 350 times in the NT. The Hebrew word for “day” is used in a variety of ways, not merely in the literal sense. The Hebrew day began in the evening and continued until the following evening, a reckonin...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12131,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","title_en":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","summary_en":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32766,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Rest","title_en":"Rest","content_ro":"<h3>REST<\/h3>\n<p>Freedom from work or activity. The source of the Christian doctrine of rest is the rest of God himself, who, after completing the work of Creation in six days, “rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done” (Gn 2:2). This provides the basis for the Hebrew Sabbath as the weekly seventh day of rest (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sabbath<\/span> is the Hebrew term for rest), which is presented as an ordinance of Creation. The fourth commandment demands the consecration of the Sabbath day to God and the limitation of labor to six days precisely because God made all things in six days and rested the seventh day (Ex 20:8-11).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical concept of rest, however, is not just past (Creation) and present (weekly) but also future. This future aspect received symbolic expression in the Israelites’ pilgrimage under the leadership of Moses through the wilderness from the bondage of Egypt to the “rest” of the Promised Land. That rest was attained under Joshua, who led them into the land and settled them there (see Jos 23–24).<\/p>\n<p>The 40 years of restless wandering in the wilderness meant that the whole adult generation that set out with Moses perished without entering the Promised Land. This was a judgment they brought upon themselves by their ingratitude and rebelliousness (Nm 14:26-35). Centuries later God warned their descendants against the danger of following this example of hard-heartedness and reaping a similar consequence of not entering his rest: “Today, when you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts” (Ps 95:7-11). The author of Hebrews cites this passage (Heb 3:7-8; 4:7) as evidence that God’s rest is not a matter of past history but that “the promise of entering his rest remains.” The word “today” indicates that the day of grace is not closed: “For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later of another day. So then, there remains a sabbath rest for the people of God” (4:8-9, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>It is <em>God’s<\/em> rest into which all persons are encouraged to enter. The weekly day of rest is a reminder and a reflection of that rest. The rest of the Israelites in the Promised Land after their wilderness wanderings is a symbol of God’s eternal rest that his people will share. The rest that Christ gives to those who come to him (Mt 11:28) is a foretaste and a guarantee of the divine rest that awaits them. The rest after death of believers who have fallen asleep in Christ is a blissful intensification of the reality of this experience: “Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord. . . . They may rest from their labors” (Rv 14:13, <span>rsv<\/span>). But the completion of this rest in its inexpressible fullness will take place at the return of Christ, when at last all who are his will be fully conformed to his likeness (1 Jn 3:2). Salvation will be consummated as they are clothed with imperishable, glorified bodies (2 Cor 5), and the renewed order of creation in which righteousness dwells will be established (2 Pt 3:13).<\/p>\n<p>This will be the climactic point of all history and the moment of the entry of God’s people into the full and unending enjoyment of his rest. The completion of the redemption purchased by Christ at the cross will mean rest and freedom from all sin, and this in turn will mean rest and freedom from all sorrow, pain, suffering, persecution, frustration, injustice, and death (Rv 7:9-17; 21:1-7). The rest of mankind, moreover, will involve the rest of God’s whole creation as it is brought to the perfection of that glorious destiny for which it was intended from the very beginning (cf. Rom 8:19-25).<\/p>\n<p>Rest is not synonymous with inactivity. What God rested from was the work of Creation. He continues constantly to be active, however, in providentially sustaining all that he has created and in the work both of righteous judgment and gracious salvation. Jesus Christ, indeed, in his incarnation, life, death, rising, and glorification, is precisely God in action (2 Cor 5:19). Hence the assertion of Jesus: “My Father is working still, and I am working” (Jn 5:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). What the Christian will rest from is the struggle against the forces of evil and the afflictions by which this present life is marred. The rest into which the Christian will enter will not be a state of uneventful boredom. God himself is dynamic, not static, and so also is his rest.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, all that a Christian rests from simply sets him free to be active ceaselessly and joyfully in the service of God, the Creator and Redeemer. In perfect harmony with all God’s works, and in complete fulfillment, Christians exultantly praise and serve the triune God. Joy will be full, without possibility of improvement or deficiency (cf. Rv 4:8-11; 5:8-14; 7:9-12). Such will be the rest without end of that eternal Sabbath that has a morning but no evening: “Let us therefore strive to enter that rest” (Heb 4:11, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Heaven; Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>REST<\/h3>\n<p>Freedom from work or activity. The source of the Christian doctrine of rest is the rest of God himself, who, after completing the work of Creation in six days, “rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done” (Gn 2:2). This provides the basis for the Hebrew Sabbath as the weekly seventh day of rest (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sabbath<\/span> is the Hebrew term for rest), which is presented as an ordinance of Creation. The fourth commandment demands the consecration of the Sabbath day to God and the limitation of labor to six days precisely because God made all things in six days and rested the seventh day (Ex 20:8-11).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical concept of rest, however, is not just past (Creation) and present (weekly) but also future. This future aspect received symbolic expression in the Israelites’ pilgrimage under the leadership of Moses through the wilderness from the bondage of Egypt to the “rest” of the Promised Land. That rest was attained under Joshua, who led them into the land and settled them there (see Jos 23–24).<\/p>\n<p>The 40 years of restless wandering in the wilderness meant that the whole adult generation that set out with Moses perished without entering the Promised Land. This was a judgment they brought upon themselves by their ingratitude and rebelliousness (Nm 14:26-35). Centuries later God warned their descendants against the danger of following this example of hard-heartedness and reaping a similar consequence of not entering his rest: “Today, when you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts” (Ps 95:7-11). The author of Hebrews cites this passage (Heb 3:7-8; 4:7) as evidence that God’s rest is not a matter of past history but that “the promise of entering his rest remains.” The word “today” indicates that the day of grace is not closed: “For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later of another day. So then, there remains a sabbath rest for the people of God” (4:8-9, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>It is <em>God’s<\/em> rest into which all persons are encouraged to enter. The weekly day of rest is a reminder and a reflection of that rest. The rest of the Israelites in the Promised Land after their wilderness wanderings is a symbol of God’s eternal rest that his people will share. The rest that Christ gives to those who come to him (Mt 11:28) is a foretaste and a guarantee of the divine rest that awaits them. The rest after death of believers who have fallen asleep in Christ is a blissful intensification of the reality of this experience: “Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord. . . . They may rest from their labors” (Rv 14:13, <span>rsv<\/span>). But the completion of this rest in its inexpressible fullness will take place at the return of Christ, when at last all who are his will be fully conformed to his likeness (1 Jn 3:2). Salvation will be consummated as they are clothed with imperishable, glorified bodies (2 Cor 5), and the renewed order of creation in which righteousness dwells will be established (2 Pt 3:13).<\/p>\n<p>This will be the climactic point of all history and the moment of the entry of God’s people into the full and unending enjoyment of his rest. The completion of the redemption purchased by Christ at the cross will mean rest and freedom from all sin, and this in turn will mean rest and freedom from all sorrow, pain, suffering, persecution, frustration, injustice, and death (Rv 7:9-17; 21:1-7). The rest of mankind, moreover, will involve the rest of God’s whole creation as it is brought to the perfection of that glorious destiny for which it was intended from the very beginning (cf. Rom 8:19-25).<\/p>\n<p>Rest is not synonymous with inactivity. What God rested from was the work of Creation. He continues constantly to be active, however, in providentially sustaining all that he has created and in the work both of righteous judgment and gracious salvation. Jesus Christ, indeed, in his incarnation, life, death, rising, and glorification, is precisely God in action (2 Cor 5:19). Hence the assertion of Jesus: “My Father is working still, and I am working” (Jn 5:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). What the Christian will rest from is the struggle against the forces of evil and the afflictions by which this present life is marred. The rest into which the Christian will enter will not be a state of uneventful boredom. God himself is dynamic, not static, and so also is his rest.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, all that a Christian rests from simply sets him free to be active ceaselessly and joyfully in the service of God, the Creator and Redeemer. In perfect harmony with all God’s works, and in complete fulfillment, Christians exultantly praise and serve the triune God. Joy will be full, without possibility of improvement or deficiency (cf. Rv 4:8-11; 5:8-14; 7:9-12). Such will be the rest without end of that eternal Sabbath that has a morning but no evening: “Let us therefore strive to enter that rest” (Heb 4:11, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Heaven; Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath.<\/p>","summary_ro":"REST Freedom from work or activity. The source of the Christian doctrine of rest is the rest of God himself, who, after completing the work of Creation in six days, “rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done” (Gn 2:2). This provides the basis for the Hebrew Sabbath as the weekly seventh day of rest (sabbath is the Hebrew term for rest), which is presented as an ordinance of Creation. The fourth commandment demands the consecration of the Sabbath day to God and the limitati...","summary_en":"REST Freedom from work or activity. The source of the Christian doctrine of rest is the rest of God himself, who, after completing the work of Creation in six days, “rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done” (Gn 2:2). This provides the basis for the Hebrew Sabbath as the weekly seventh day of rest (sabbath is the Hebrew term for rest), which is presented as an ordinance of Creation. The fourth commandment demands the consecration of the Sabbath day to God and the limitati...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33397,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sabbath","title_en":"Sabbath","content_ro":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","summary_en":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35854,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of Man","title_en":"Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","summary_en":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43843,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:8","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:8-11<\/strong> The <em>Sabbath day<\/em> is kept <em>holy<\/em> when it is <em>dedicated to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for <em>ordinary work<\/em> (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:8-11<\/strong> The <em>Sabbath day<\/em> is kept <em>holy<\/em> when it is <em>dedicated to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for <em>ordinary work<\/em> (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:8-11 The Sabbath day is kept holy when it is dedicated to the Lord (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for ordinary work (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).","summary_en":"20:8-11 The Sabbath day is kept holy when it is dedicated to the Lord (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for ordinary work (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71469,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:8","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:8-11<\/strong> The <em>Sabbath day<\/em> is kept <em>holy<\/em> when it is <em>dedicated to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for <em>ordinary work<\/em> (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:8-11<\/strong> The <em>Sabbath day<\/em> is kept <em>holy<\/em> when it is <em>dedicated to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for <em>ordinary work<\/em> (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:8-11 The Sabbath day is kept holy when it is dedicated to the Lord (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for ordinary work (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).","summary_en":"20:8-11 The Sabbath day is kept holy when it is dedicated to the Lord (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for ordinary work (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99095,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:8","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:8-11<\/strong> The <em>Sabbath day<\/em> is kept <em>holy<\/em> when it is <em>dedicated to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for <em>ordinary work<\/em> (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:8-11<\/strong> The <em>Sabbath day<\/em> is kept <em>holy<\/em> when it is <em>dedicated to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for <em>ordinary work<\/em> (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:8-11 The Sabbath day is kept holy when it is dedicated to the Lord (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for ordinary work (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).","summary_en":"20:8-11 The Sabbath day is kept holy when it is dedicated to the Lord (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for ordinary work (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126721,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:8","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:8-11<\/strong> The <em>Sabbath day<\/em> is kept <em>holy<\/em> when it is <em>dedicated to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for <em>ordinary work<\/em> (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:8-11<\/strong> The <em>Sabbath day<\/em> is kept <em>holy<\/em> when it is <em>dedicated to the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for <em>ordinary work<\/em> (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:8-11 The Sabbath day is kept holy when it is dedicated to the Lord (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for ordinary work (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).","summary_en":"20:8-11 The Sabbath day is kept holy when it is dedicated to the Lord (20:10). Whatever belongs exclusively to God shares his character. This is not to say that the other six days are unholy, but simply that they are for ordinary work (20:9). On this day set apart, we are reminded that it is not our work that supplies our needs. Our needs are supplied by God as an act of his grace (20:6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60361,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60441,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holiness by Relationship","title_en":"Holiness by Relationship","content_ro":"<h3>Holiness by Relationship<\/h3>\n<p>Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy?<\/p>\n<p>We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself there (see Exod 3:5); if his presence is withdrawn, the place reverts to being ordinary. When God declares an object to be holy, such as an altar (Exod 29:44-46), it is because it was built in the manner prescribed by God and has been accepted by God for his service. Its relationship to God makes it holy as nothing else could.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same for people. We are told to be holy because God is holy (Lev 19:2; 1 Pet 1:15-16). Such holiness can only be imputed to humans. Without a relationship with God, true holiness remains elusive, no matter how good, pious, or disciplined a person’s life might be. Only God can make people holy (Exod 31:13; Lev 20:8; 22:32). God promises to be with his people and make their holiness possible (Hos 11:9; see Isa 35:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>The church, like Israel of the Old Testament, shares a relationship with God. Our adoption as God’s children allows us to become godly people (see Exod 4:22; Rom 8:14; Gal 3:26; 1 Jn 3:2). The atoning death of Jesus, the Holy One, makes it possible for all who call on him by faith to enjoy a right relationship with him (Rom 5:12-21), which serves as the basis of our holiness (see 1 Cor 6:11). We can be holy in our standing with God as well as in our conduct toward other people—but only through our connection to the holy God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 3:5; 20:8-11; 28:29-35; 29:44-46; 31:13; Lev 11:44-45; 19:1-3; 20:3-8; 22:32; Ps 24:3-6; Isa 35:8-10; Dan 4:8-9; Rom 8:5-14; Gal 3:2-3; 5:16-26; 1 Pet 1:13-16; 1 Jn 3:2-3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holiness by Relationship<\/h3>\n<p>Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy?<\/p>\n<p>We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself there (see Exod 3:5); if his presence is withdrawn, the place reverts to being ordinary. When God declares an object to be holy, such as an altar (Exod 29:44-46), it is because it was built in the manner prescribed by God and has been accepted by God for his service. Its relationship to God makes it holy as nothing else could.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same for people. We are told to be holy because God is holy (Lev 19:2; 1 Pet 1:15-16). Such holiness can only be imputed to humans. Without a relationship with God, true holiness remains elusive, no matter how good, pious, or disciplined a person’s life might be. Only God can make people holy (Exod 31:13; Lev 20:8; 22:32). God promises to be with his people and make their holiness possible (Hos 11:9; see Isa 35:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>The church, like Israel of the Old Testament, shares a relationship with God. Our adoption as God’s children allows us to become godly people (see Exod 4:22; Rom 8:14; Gal 3:26; 1 Jn 3:2). The atoning death of Jesus, the Holy One, makes it possible for all who call on him by faith to enjoy a right relationship with him (Rom 5:12-21), which serves as the basis of our holiness (see 1 Cor 6:11). We can be holy in our standing with God as well as in our conduct toward other people—but only through our connection to the holy God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 3:5; 20:8-11; 28:29-35; 29:44-46; 31:13; Lev 11:44-45; 19:1-3; 20:3-8; 22:32; Ps 24:3-6; Isa 35:8-10; Dan 4:8-9; Rom 8:5-14; Gal 3:2-3; 5:16-26; 1 Pet 1:13-16; 1 Jn 3:2-3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holiness by Relationship Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy? We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God. When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself the...","summary_en":"Holiness by Relationship Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy? We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God. When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself the...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67641,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest","title_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","summary_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87987,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88067,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holiness by Relationship","title_en":"Holiness by Relationship","content_ro":"<h3>Holiness by Relationship<\/h3>\n<p>Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy?<\/p>\n<p>We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself there (see Exod 3:5); if his presence is withdrawn, the place reverts to being ordinary. When God declares an object to be holy, such as an altar (Exod 29:44-46), it is because it was built in the manner prescribed by God and has been accepted by God for his service. Its relationship to God makes it holy as nothing else could.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same for people. We are told to be holy because God is holy (Lev 19:2; 1 Pet 1:15-16). Such holiness can only be imputed to humans. Without a relationship with God, true holiness remains elusive, no matter how good, pious, or disciplined a person’s life might be. Only God can make people holy (Exod 31:13; Lev 20:8; 22:32). God promises to be with his people and make their holiness possible (Hos 11:9; see Isa 35:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>The church, like Israel of the Old Testament, shares a relationship with God. Our adoption as God’s children allows us to become godly people (see Exod 4:22; Rom 8:14; Gal 3:26; 1 Jn 3:2). The atoning death of Jesus, the Holy One, makes it possible for all who call on him by faith to enjoy a right relationship with him (Rom 5:12-21), which serves as the basis of our holiness (see 1 Cor 6:11). We can be holy in our standing with God as well as in our conduct toward other people—but only through our connection to the holy God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 3:5; 20:8-11; 28:29-35; 29:44-46; 31:13; Lev 11:44-45; 19:1-3; 20:3-8; 22:32; Ps 24:3-6; Isa 35:8-10; Dan 4:8-9; Rom 8:5-14; Gal 3:2-3; 5:16-26; 1 Pet 1:13-16; 1 Jn 3:2-3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holiness by Relationship<\/h3>\n<p>Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy?<\/p>\n<p>We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself there (see Exod 3:5); if his presence is withdrawn, the place reverts to being ordinary. When God declares an object to be holy, such as an altar (Exod 29:44-46), it is because it was built in the manner prescribed by God and has been accepted by God for his service. Its relationship to God makes it holy as nothing else could.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same for people. We are told to be holy because God is holy (Lev 19:2; 1 Pet 1:15-16). Such holiness can only be imputed to humans. Without a relationship with God, true holiness remains elusive, no matter how good, pious, or disciplined a person’s life might be. Only God can make people holy (Exod 31:13; Lev 20:8; 22:32). God promises to be with his people and make their holiness possible (Hos 11:9; see Isa 35:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>The church, like Israel of the Old Testament, shares a relationship with God. Our adoption as God’s children allows us to become godly people (see Exod 4:22; Rom 8:14; Gal 3:26; 1 Jn 3:2). The atoning death of Jesus, the Holy One, makes it possible for all who call on him by faith to enjoy a right relationship with him (Rom 5:12-21), which serves as the basis of our holiness (see 1 Cor 6:11). We can be holy in our standing with God as well as in our conduct toward other people—but only through our connection to the holy God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 3:5; 20:8-11; 28:29-35; 29:44-46; 31:13; Lev 11:44-45; 19:1-3; 20:3-8; 22:32; Ps 24:3-6; Isa 35:8-10; Dan 4:8-9; Rom 8:5-14; Gal 3:2-3; 5:16-26; 1 Pet 1:13-16; 1 Jn 3:2-3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holiness by Relationship Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy? We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God. When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself the...","summary_en":"Holiness by Relationship Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy? We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God. When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself the...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95267,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest","title_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","summary_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115613,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115693,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holiness by Relationship","title_en":"Holiness by Relationship","content_ro":"<h3>Holiness by Relationship<\/h3>\n<p>Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy?<\/p>\n<p>We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself there (see Exod 3:5); if his presence is withdrawn, the place reverts to being ordinary. When God declares an object to be holy, such as an altar (Exod 29:44-46), it is because it was built in the manner prescribed by God and has been accepted by God for his service. Its relationship to God makes it holy as nothing else could.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same for people. We are told to be holy because God is holy (Lev 19:2; 1 Pet 1:15-16). Such holiness can only be imputed to humans. Without a relationship with God, true holiness remains elusive, no matter how good, pious, or disciplined a person’s life might be. Only God can make people holy (Exod 31:13; Lev 20:8; 22:32). God promises to be with his people and make their holiness possible (Hos 11:9; see Isa 35:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>The church, like Israel of the Old Testament, shares a relationship with God. Our adoption as God’s children allows us to become godly people (see Exod 4:22; Rom 8:14; Gal 3:26; 1 Jn 3:2). The atoning death of Jesus, the Holy One, makes it possible for all who call on him by faith to enjoy a right relationship with him (Rom 5:12-21), which serves as the basis of our holiness (see 1 Cor 6:11). We can be holy in our standing with God as well as in our conduct toward other people—but only through our connection to the holy God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 3:5; 20:8-11; 28:29-35; 29:44-46; 31:13; Lev 11:44-45; 19:1-3; 20:3-8; 22:32; Ps 24:3-6; Isa 35:8-10; Dan 4:8-9; Rom 8:5-14; Gal 3:2-3; 5:16-26; 1 Pet 1:13-16; 1 Jn 3:2-3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holiness by Relationship<\/h3>\n<p>Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy?<\/p>\n<p>We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself there (see Exod 3:5); if his presence is withdrawn, the place reverts to being ordinary. When God declares an object to be holy, such as an altar (Exod 29:44-46), it is because it was built in the manner prescribed by God and has been accepted by God for his service. Its relationship to God makes it holy as nothing else could.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same for people. We are told to be holy because God is holy (Lev 19:2; 1 Pet 1:15-16). Such holiness can only be imputed to humans. Without a relationship with God, true holiness remains elusive, no matter how good, pious, or disciplined a person’s life might be. Only God can make people holy (Exod 31:13; Lev 20:8; 22:32). God promises to be with his people and make their holiness possible (Hos 11:9; see Isa 35:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>The church, like Israel of the Old Testament, shares a relationship with God. Our adoption as God’s children allows us to become godly people (see Exod 4:22; Rom 8:14; Gal 3:26; 1 Jn 3:2). The atoning death of Jesus, the Holy One, makes it possible for all who call on him by faith to enjoy a right relationship with him (Rom 5:12-21), which serves as the basis of our holiness (see 1 Cor 6:11). We can be holy in our standing with God as well as in our conduct toward other people—but only through our connection to the holy God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 3:5; 20:8-11; 28:29-35; 29:44-46; 31:13; Lev 11:44-45; 19:1-3; 20:3-8; 22:32; Ps 24:3-6; Isa 35:8-10; Dan 4:8-9; Rom 8:5-14; Gal 3:2-3; 5:16-26; 1 Pet 1:13-16; 1 Jn 3:2-3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holiness by Relationship Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy? We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God. When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself the...","summary_en":"Holiness by Relationship Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy? We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God. When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself the...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122893,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest","title_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","summary_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143239,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143319,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Holiness by Relationship","title_en":"Holiness by Relationship","content_ro":"<h3>Holiness by Relationship<\/h3>\n<p>Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy?<\/p>\n<p>We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself there (see Exod 3:5); if his presence is withdrawn, the place reverts to being ordinary. When God declares an object to be holy, such as an altar (Exod 29:44-46), it is because it was built in the manner prescribed by God and has been accepted by God for his service. Its relationship to God makes it holy as nothing else could.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same for people. We are told to be holy because God is holy (Lev 19:2; 1 Pet 1:15-16). Such holiness can only be imputed to humans. Without a relationship with God, true holiness remains elusive, no matter how good, pious, or disciplined a person’s life might be. Only God can make people holy (Exod 31:13; Lev 20:8; 22:32). God promises to be with his people and make their holiness possible (Hos 11:9; see Isa 35:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>The church, like Israel of the Old Testament, shares a relationship with God. Our adoption as God’s children allows us to become godly people (see Exod 4:22; Rom 8:14; Gal 3:26; 1 Jn 3:2). The atoning death of Jesus, the Holy One, makes it possible for all who call on him by faith to enjoy a right relationship with him (Rom 5:12-21), which serves as the basis of our holiness (see 1 Cor 6:11). We can be holy in our standing with God as well as in our conduct toward other people—but only through our connection to the holy God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 3:5; 20:8-11; 28:29-35; 29:44-46; 31:13; Lev 11:44-45; 19:1-3; 20:3-8; 22:32; Ps 24:3-6; Isa 35:8-10; Dan 4:8-9; Rom 8:5-14; Gal 3:2-3; 5:16-26; 1 Pet 1:13-16; 1 Jn 3:2-3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Holiness by Relationship<\/h3>\n<p>Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy?<\/p>\n<p>We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself there (see Exod 3:5); if his presence is withdrawn, the place reverts to being ordinary. When God declares an object to be holy, such as an altar (Exod 29:44-46), it is because it was built in the manner prescribed by God and has been accepted by God for his service. Its relationship to God makes it holy as nothing else could.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same for people. We are told to be holy because God is holy (Lev 19:2; 1 Pet 1:15-16). Such holiness can only be imputed to humans. Without a relationship with God, true holiness remains elusive, no matter how good, pious, or disciplined a person’s life might be. Only God can make people holy (Exod 31:13; Lev 20:8; 22:32). God promises to be with his people and make their holiness possible (Hos 11:9; see Isa 35:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>The church, like Israel of the Old Testament, shares a relationship with God. Our adoption as God’s children allows us to become godly people (see Exod 4:22; Rom 8:14; Gal 3:26; 1 Jn 3:2). The atoning death of Jesus, the Holy One, makes it possible for all who call on him by faith to enjoy a right relationship with him (Rom 5:12-21), which serves as the basis of our holiness (see 1 Cor 6:11). We can be holy in our standing with God as well as in our conduct toward other people—but only through our connection to the holy God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 3:5; 20:8-11; 28:29-35; 29:44-46; 31:13; Lev 11:44-45; 19:1-3; 20:3-8; 22:32; Ps 24:3-6; Isa 35:8-10; Dan 4:8-9; Rom 8:5-14; Gal 3:2-3; 5:16-26; 1 Pet 1:13-16; 1 Jn 3:2-3<\/p>","summary_ro":"Holiness by Relationship Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy? We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God. When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself the...","summary_en":"Holiness by Relationship Holiness refers to God’s transcendent character (Lev 10:3). How can we, finite creatures who have fallen into sin, be holy as God is holy? We can never become transcendent like God. We will always be finite creatures, and our holiness cannot be absolute the way God’s holiness is. Thus our holiness does not refer to our own nature and character. Instead, it refers to our relationship with God. When God declares a place to be holy, it is because he manifests himself the...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150519,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest","title_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","summary_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":12614,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Foreigner","title_en":"Foreigner","content_ro":"<h3>FOREIGNER<\/h3>\n<p>Noncitizen or alien, temporary guest, sojourner, or stranger.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word meaning “foreigner” is rendered correctly on all occasions in the <span>rsv<\/span>, but the <span>kjv<\/span> uses it in its truest sense on only two occasions (Dt 15:3; Ob 1:11). In most cases the <span>kjv<\/span> translates the word as “alien” (Dt 14:21; Jb 19:15; Ps 69:8; Lam 5:2) or “stranger” (Gn 15:13; Ex 2:22; Lv 25:35). Another Hebrew word means “dweller” (Lv 25:35; 1 Chr 29:15; Ps 39:12) or “settler.” For the most part, however, it is rendered “foreigner.”<\/p>\n<p>A temporary guest or sojourner was usually someone who wanted to take up temporary residence or had moved from one tribe of people to another, and then attempted to obtain certain privileges or rights belonging to the natives. A whole tribe might be sojourners in Israel. This was the case with the Gibeonites (Jos 9) and the Beerothites (2 Sm 4:3; cf. 2 Chr 2:17). The Israelites themselves were sojourners in the land of Egypt (Gn 15:13; 23:4; 26:3; 47:4; Ex 2:22; 23:9) and in other lands (Ru 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>Foreigners or sojourners had certain rights but also certain limitations while in Israel. They could offer sacrifices (Lv 17:8; 22:18) but could not enter the sanctuary unless circumcised (Ez 44:9). They were allowed to participate in the three great Jewish festivals (Dt 16:11, 14) but could not eat the Passover meal unless circumcised (Ex 12:43, 48). Foreigners were not obliged to follow the Israelite religion, but they shared in some of its benefits (Dt 14:29). They were not to work on the Sabbath or the Day of Atonement (Ex 20:10; 23:12; Lv 16:29; Dt 5:14) and could be stoned for reviling or blaspheming God’s name (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:30). Foreigners were forbidden to eat blood (Lv 17:10-12) but could eat animals that had died a natural death (Dt 14:21). Israel’s code of sexual morality also applied to the foreigner (Lv 18:26). There were prohibitions against Israelites intermarrying with foreigners, but it was nevertheless a common occurrence (Gn 34:14; Ex 34:12, 16; Dt 7:3-4; Jos 23:12).<\/p>\n<p>Civil rights were provided for foreigners by the law of Moses (Ex 12:49; Lv 24:22), and they came under the same legal processes and penalties (Lv 20:2; 24:16, 22; Dt 1:16). They were to be treated politely (Ex 22:21; 23:9), loved as those under the love of God (Lv 19:34; Dt 10:18-19), and treated generously (Lv 19:10; 23:22; Dt 24:19-22). They could receive asylum in times of trouble (Nm 35:15; Jos 20:9). Foreign servants were to receive treatment equal to Hebrew servants (Dt 24:14). A foreigner could not take part in tribal deliberations or become a king (17:15). The prophet Ezekiel looked forward to the messianic age when the foreigner would share all the blessings of the land with God’s own people (Ez 47:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, “foreigner” is often used metaphorically. On the one hand, the work of Christ allowed all foreigners (i.e., those alienated from Christ) to become members of God’s household (Eph 2:11-19). On the other hand, Christians should consider themselves foreigners in this world (Heb 11:13; 1 Pt 2:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Barbarian; Neighbor.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FOREIGNER<\/h3>\n<p>Noncitizen or alien, temporary guest, sojourner, or stranger.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word meaning “foreigner” is rendered correctly on all occasions in the <span>rsv<\/span>, but the <span>kjv<\/span> uses it in its truest sense on only two occasions (Dt 15:3; Ob 1:11). In most cases the <span>kjv<\/span> translates the word as “alien” (Dt 14:21; Jb 19:15; Ps 69:8; Lam 5:2) or “stranger” (Gn 15:13; Ex 2:22; Lv 25:35). Another Hebrew word means “dweller” (Lv 25:35; 1 Chr 29:15; Ps 39:12) or “settler.” For the most part, however, it is rendered “foreigner.”<\/p>\n<p>A temporary guest or sojourner was usually someone who wanted to take up temporary residence or had moved from one tribe of people to another, and then attempted to obtain certain privileges or rights belonging to the natives. A whole tribe might be sojourners in Israel. This was the case with the Gibeonites (Jos 9) and the Beerothites (2 Sm 4:3; cf. 2 Chr 2:17). The Israelites themselves were sojourners in the land of Egypt (Gn 15:13; 23:4; 26:3; 47:4; Ex 2:22; 23:9) and in other lands (Ru 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>Foreigners or sojourners had certain rights but also certain limitations while in Israel. They could offer sacrifices (Lv 17:8; 22:18) but could not enter the sanctuary unless circumcised (Ez 44:9). They were allowed to participate in the three great Jewish festivals (Dt 16:11, 14) but could not eat the Passover meal unless circumcised (Ex 12:43, 48). Foreigners were not obliged to follow the Israelite religion, but they shared in some of its benefits (Dt 14:29). They were not to work on the Sabbath or the Day of Atonement (Ex 20:10; 23:12; Lv 16:29; Dt 5:14) and could be stoned for reviling or blaspheming God’s name (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:30). Foreigners were forbidden to eat blood (Lv 17:10-12) but could eat animals that had died a natural death (Dt 14:21). Israel’s code of sexual morality also applied to the foreigner (Lv 18:26). There were prohibitions against Israelites intermarrying with foreigners, but it was nevertheless a common occurrence (Gn 34:14; Ex 34:12, 16; Dt 7:3-4; Jos 23:12).<\/p>\n<p>Civil rights were provided for foreigners by the law of Moses (Ex 12:49; Lv 24:22), and they came under the same legal processes and penalties (Lv 20:2; 24:16, 22; Dt 1:16). They were to be treated politely (Ex 22:21; 23:9), loved as those under the love of God (Lv 19:34; Dt 10:18-19), and treated generously (Lv 19:10; 23:22; Dt 24:19-22). They could receive asylum in times of trouble (Nm 35:15; Jos 20:9). Foreign servants were to receive treatment equal to Hebrew servants (Dt 24:14). A foreigner could not take part in tribal deliberations or become a king (17:15). The prophet Ezekiel looked forward to the messianic age when the foreigner would share all the blessings of the land with God’s own people (Ez 47:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, “foreigner” is often used metaphorically. On the one hand, the work of Christ allowed all foreigners (i.e., those alienated from Christ) to become members of God’s household (Eph 2:11-19). On the other hand, Christians should consider themselves foreigners in this world (Heb 11:13; 1 Pt 2:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Barbarian; Neighbor.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FOREIGNER Noncitizen or alien, temporary guest, sojourner, or stranger. The Hebrew word meaning “foreigner” is rendered correctly on all occasions in the rsv, but the kjv uses it in its truest sense on only two occasions (Dt 15:3; Ob 1:11). In most cases the kjv translates the word as “alien” (Dt 14:21; Jb 19:15; Ps 69:8; Lam 5:2) or “stranger” (Gn 15:13; Ex 2:22; Lv 25:35). Another Hebrew word means “dweller” (Lv 25:35; 1 Chr 29:15; Ps 39:12) or “settler.” For the most part, however, it is r...","summary_en":"FOREIGNER Noncitizen or alien, temporary guest, sojourner, or stranger. The Hebrew word meaning “foreigner” is rendered correctly on all occasions in the rsv, but the kjv uses it in its truest sense on only two occasions (Dt 15:3; Ob 1:11). In most cases the kjv translates the word as “alien” (Dt 14:21; Jb 19:15; Ps 69:8; Lam 5:2) or “stranger” (Gn 15:13; Ex 2:22; Lv 25:35). Another Hebrew word means “dweller” (Lv 25:35; 1 Chr 29:15; Ps 39:12) or “settler.” For the most part, however, it is r...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33399,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sabbath","title_en":"Sabbath","content_ro":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","summary_en":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":7285,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandments, the Ten","title_en":"Commandments, the Ten","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31163,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Prayer of Manasseh*","title_en":"Prayer of Manasseh*","content_ro":"<h3>PRAYER OF MANASSEH*<\/h3>\n<p>This short prayer, ascribed to King Manasseh of Judah, is often regarded as the finest composition in the entire English Apocrypha. During the Reformation, Protestants highly valued its piety. However, neither Protestants, Roman Catholics, nor the Eastern Orthodox regard it as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The older title, The Prayer of Manasses King of Judah When He was Holden [Held] Captive in Babylon (<span>kjv<\/span>, <span>erv<\/span>), is more helpful than the one commonly used today (<span>rsv<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>) or the Latin one, <em>Oration Manassae.<\/em> The older title alerts the reader to the supposed connection between this prayer and King Manasseh (696–642 <span>BC<\/span>), who was taken captive to Babylon, where “at last he came to his senses and cried out humbly to God for help. And the Lord listened, and answered his plea by returning him to Jerusalem and to his kingdom!” (2 Chr 33:12-13, <span>tlb<\/span>; on the historicity of this account, see Manasseh #3). The writer of 2 Chronicles indicates that this prayer was available to him from national archives and from another work (2 Chr 33:18-19). The prayer was composed by an anonymous author, though the date is uncertain. On internal evidence it has been dated between 250 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 50. The oldest surviving Greek biblical manuscript containing it is Codex Alexandrinus (fifth century <span>AD<\/span>), but the earliest evidence for its existence is its inclusion in a Syriac manual of church procedures known as <em>Didascalia<\/em> (third century <span>AD<\/span>), which, in a revised and expanded form, also appeared as a part of the <em>Apostolic Constitutions<\/em> (<span>AD<\/span> 380).<\/p>\n<p>Most scholars believe that the prayer was originally composed in Greek, but for such a short book—about 400 words in English—the problem of determining the original language is difficult. Because the Prayer of Manasseh survives both in Greek and in Syriac, Latin (two forms), Ethiopic, Armenian, and Old Slavonic translation, it was clearly popular in the first three Christian centuries, among both Jews and Christians.<\/p>\n<p>The Prayer of Manasseh is the prayer of a self-confessed sinner to a merciful God. The <span>rsv<\/span> (which is quoted below unless otherwise noted) and <span>neb<\/span> divide the Prayer of Manasseh into 15 verses. KJV and <span>erv<\/span> do not indicate verses, and a rarer system divides the prayer into 19 verses. The prayer uses several descriptions of God drawn from the OT. It begins by identifying God as “Lord Almighty” (Prayer of Manasseh 1:1; cf. 2 Cor 6:18) and “God of our fathers” (Prayer of Manasseh 1:1, cf. 2 Chr 20:6; 33:12) and of their righteous descendants. God is the Creator—glorious and powerful, wrathful yet merciful (Prayer of Manasseh 1:2-7a). He “made heaven and earth” (v 2; cf. Ex 20:11; Neh 9:6; Ps 146:6) “in their manifold array” (Prayer of Manasseh 1:2, <span>neb<\/span>). He “shackled the sea” and “confined the deep” (v 3; cf. Jb 38:8-11). No one can endure his glorious majesty (Prayer of Manasseh 1:5a; contrast 2 Pt 1:16-17). His power makes every creature “shudder, and tremble” (Prayer of Manasseh 1:4), but his goodness is demonstrated in mercy and in salvation (vv 7, 14; cf. Is 63:7 and Rom 2:4), for he is compassionate, patiently long-suffering (forbearing), and very merciful (Prayer of Manasseh 1:7; cf. Ps 86:5, 15). God is “the Lord Most High” (Prayer of Manasseh 1:7; cf. Ps 7:17; 47:2).<\/p>\n<p>Even so, Manasseh confesses that “none can endure thy menacing wrath against sinners” (Prayer of Manasseh 1:5b, <span>neb<\/span>). He recognizes that his idolatry has been evil in God’s eyes all along, even though he has just become aware that he has been “piling sin upon sin” (v 10, <span>neb<\/span>). He also knows now that he finds himself in irons and rejected by God because his idolatry has provoked God’s wrath (v 10; cf. 2 Chr 33:6 and Ps 107:10). God’s mercy is his only hope. It is unmeasurable and unfathomable (Prayer of Manasseh 1:6), boundless (v 7, <span>neb<\/span>), and great (v 14). God’s mercy is also available, because the Lord himself has “appointed repentance for sinners, that they may be saved” (v 7; cf. Acts 5:31), and for him in particular (v 8).<\/p>\n<p>The heart of the prayer (vv 9-13a), in which he confesses his sin and appeals for forgiveness, contains three memorable lines: “My transgressions abound, O Lord, my transgressions abound. . . . Forgive me, O Lord, forgive me!” The turning point in the prayer comes in verse 11, after his confession of sin. The <span>rsv<\/span> preserves the figure of speech: “And now I bend the knee of my heart, beseeching thee for thy kindness.” Despite his unworthiness (vv 9, 14), he pleads with God not to destroy him, nor be eternally angry with him, nor condemn him to the grave, because the Lord is “the God of those who repent” (v 13). Manasseh becomes confident that God, in his goodness and mercy, will save him (v 14), and he shows the appropriate response of a forgiven sinner when he says, “I will praise thee continually all the days of my life” (v 15). A brief doxology about God’s praise and eternal glory concludes the prayer.<\/p>\n<p>Despite its admirable parts, this prayer differs from Christian teaching in one significant way. The author erroneously assumes that there are two categories of people—those who are basically good (the righteous) and those who are basically bad (sinners). The prayer presents Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as righteous men who did not sin and did not need to repent. This is not true, but it shows Jewish thinking prior to Christian preaching (cf. Mt 9:13). Paul made it quite plain that no person is righteous on his own merit, because every person has sinned (Rom 3:10-12, 21-26). Abraham’s righteousness was not inherent; it came by faith (Rom 4:3; cf. Phil 3:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apocrypha.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PRAYER OF MANASSEH*<\/h3>\n<p>This short prayer, ascribed to King Manasseh of Judah, is often regarded as the finest composition in the entire English Apocrypha. During the Reformation, Protestants highly valued its piety. However, neither Protestants, Roman Catholics, nor the Eastern Orthodox regard it as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The older title, The Prayer of Manasses King of Judah When He was Holden [Held] Captive in Babylon (<span>kjv<\/span>, <span>erv<\/span>), is more helpful than the one commonly used today (<span>rsv<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>) or the Latin one, <em>Oration Manassae.<\/em> The older title alerts the reader to the supposed connection between this prayer and King Manasseh (696–642 <span>BC<\/span>), who was taken captive to Babylon, where “at last he came to his senses and cried out humbly to God for help. And the Lord listened, and answered his plea by returning him to Jerusalem and to his kingdom!” (2 Chr 33:12-13, <span>tlb<\/span>; on the historicity of this account, see Manasseh #3). The writer of 2 Chronicles indicates that this prayer was available to him from national archives and from another work (2 Chr 33:18-19). The prayer was composed by an anonymous author, though the date is uncertain. On internal evidence it has been dated between 250 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 50. The oldest surviving Greek biblical manuscript containing it is Codex Alexandrinus (fifth century <span>AD<\/span>), but the earliest evidence for its existence is its inclusion in a Syriac manual of church procedures known as <em>Didascalia<\/em> (third century <span>AD<\/span>), which, in a revised and expanded form, also appeared as a part of the <em>Apostolic Constitutions<\/em> (<span>AD<\/span> 380).<\/p>\n<p>Most scholars believe that the prayer was originally composed in Greek, but for such a short book—about 400 words in English—the problem of determining the original language is difficult. Because the Prayer of Manasseh survives both in Greek and in Syriac, Latin (two forms), Ethiopic, Armenian, and Old Slavonic translation, it was clearly popular in the first three Christian centuries, among both Jews and Christians.<\/p>\n<p>The Prayer of Manasseh is the prayer of a self-confessed sinner to a merciful God. The <span>rsv<\/span> (which is quoted below unless otherwise noted) and <span>neb<\/span> divide the Prayer of Manasseh into 15 verses. KJV and <span>erv<\/span> do not indicate verses, and a rarer system divides the prayer into 19 verses. The prayer uses several descriptions of God drawn from the OT. It begins by identifying God as “Lord Almighty” (Prayer of Manasseh 1:1; cf. 2 Cor 6:18) and “God of our fathers” (Prayer of Manasseh 1:1, cf. 2 Chr 20:6; 33:12) and of their righteous descendants. God is the Creator—glorious and powerful, wrathful yet merciful (Prayer of Manasseh 1:2-7a). He “made heaven and earth” (v 2; cf. Ex 20:11; Neh 9:6; Ps 146:6) “in their manifold array” (Prayer of Manasseh 1:2, <span>neb<\/span>). He “shackled the sea” and “confined the deep” (v 3; cf. Jb 38:8-11). No one can endure his glorious majesty (Prayer of Manasseh 1:5a; contrast 2 Pt 1:16-17). His power makes every creature “shudder, and tremble” (Prayer of Manasseh 1:4), but his goodness is demonstrated in mercy and in salvation (vv 7, 14; cf. Is 63:7 and Rom 2:4), for he is compassionate, patiently long-suffering (forbearing), and very merciful (Prayer of Manasseh 1:7; cf. Ps 86:5, 15). God is “the Lord Most High” (Prayer of Manasseh 1:7; cf. Ps 7:17; 47:2).<\/p>\n<p>Even so, Manasseh confesses that “none can endure thy menacing wrath against sinners” (Prayer of Manasseh 1:5b, <span>neb<\/span>). He recognizes that his idolatry has been evil in God’s eyes all along, even though he has just become aware that he has been “piling sin upon sin” (v 10, <span>neb<\/span>). He also knows now that he finds himself in irons and rejected by God because his idolatry has provoked God’s wrath (v 10; cf. 2 Chr 33:6 and Ps 107:10). God’s mercy is his only hope. It is unmeasurable and unfathomable (Prayer of Manasseh 1:6), boundless (v 7, <span>neb<\/span>), and great (v 14). God’s mercy is also available, because the Lord himself has “appointed repentance for sinners, that they may be saved” (v 7; cf. Acts 5:31), and for him in particular (v 8).<\/p>\n<p>The heart of the prayer (vv 9-13a), in which he confesses his sin and appeals for forgiveness, contains three memorable lines: “My transgressions abound, O Lord, my transgressions abound. . . . Forgive me, O Lord, forgive me!” The turning point in the prayer comes in verse 11, after his confession of sin. The <span>rsv<\/span> preserves the figure of speech: “And now I bend the knee of my heart, beseeching thee for thy kindness.” Despite his unworthiness (vv 9, 14), he pleads with God not to destroy him, nor be eternally angry with him, nor condemn him to the grave, because the Lord is “the God of those who repent” (v 13). Manasseh becomes confident that God, in his goodness and mercy, will save him (v 14), and he shows the appropriate response of a forgiven sinner when he says, “I will praise thee continually all the days of my life” (v 15). A brief doxology about God’s praise and eternal glory concludes the prayer.<\/p>\n<p>Despite its admirable parts, this prayer differs from Christian teaching in one significant way. The author erroneously assumes that there are two categories of people—those who are basically good (the righteous) and those who are basically bad (sinners). The prayer presents Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as righteous men who did not sin and did not need to repent. This is not true, but it shows Jewish thinking prior to Christian preaching (cf. Mt 9:13). Paul made it quite plain that no person is righteous on his own merit, because every person has sinned (Rom 3:10-12, 21-26). Abraham’s righteousness was not inherent; it came by faith (Rom 4:3; cf. Phil 3:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apocrypha.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PRAYER OF MANASSEH* This short prayer, ascribed to King Manasseh of Judah, is often regarded as the finest composition in the entire English Apocrypha. During the Reformation, Protestants highly valued its piety. However, neither Protestants, Roman Catholics, nor the Eastern Orthodox regard it as Scripture. The older title, The Prayer of Manasses King of Judah When He was Holden [Held] Captive in Babylon (kjv, erv), is more helpful than the one commonly used today (rsv, neb) or the Latin one,...","summary_en":"PRAYER OF MANASSEH* This short prayer, ascribed to King Manasseh of Judah, is often regarded as the finest composition in the entire English Apocrypha. During the Reformation, Protestants highly valued its piety. However, neither Protestants, Roman Catholics, nor the Eastern Orthodox regard it as Scripture. The older title, The Prayer of Manasses King of Judah When He was Holden [Held] Captive in Babylon (kjv, erv), is more helpful than the one commonly used today (rsv, neb) or the Latin one,...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33415,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sabbath","title_en":"Sabbath","content_ro":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","summary_en":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43844,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:11","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:11<\/strong> To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he <em>rested<\/em> from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:11<\/strong> To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he <em>rested<\/em> from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:11 To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he rested from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?","summary_en":"20:11 To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he rested from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71470,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:11","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:11<\/strong> To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he <em>rested<\/em> from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:11<\/strong> To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he <em>rested<\/em> from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:11 To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he rested from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?","summary_en":"20:11 To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he rested from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99096,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:11","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:11<\/strong> To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he <em>rested<\/em> from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:11<\/strong> To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he <em>rested<\/em> from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:11 To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he rested from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?","summary_en":"20:11 To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he rested from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126722,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:11","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:11<\/strong> To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he <em>rested<\/em> from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:11<\/strong> To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he <em>rested<\/em> from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:11 To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he rested from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?","summary_en":"20:11 To be in covenant with God is to do what God does; since he rested from his work (Gen 2:1-3), how can we think that we need no rest?","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":7287,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandments, the Ten","title_en":"Commandments, the Ten","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7547,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Corban*","title_en":"Corban*","content_ro":"<h3>CORBAN*<\/h3>\n<p>Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">korban<\/span><em>)<\/em> that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering.<\/p>\n<p>Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span>) and was rarely reversed (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span> 5), for violation of a corban vow risked the severe consequences of divine judgment. In Mark 7 Jesus chastises the scribes because, theoretically, a son could exclude his parents from gaining any benefit from his estate by declaring his property “corban to them.” This in effect nullifies the fifth commandment (see Ex 20:12), setting rabbinic traditions against the law of Moses. Worse still, if the son repented of his vow—arguing that it had been given in haste—a rabbinic tribunal would no doubt forbid a reversal of corban (Mk 7:12; cf Nm 30:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CORBAN*<\/h3>\n<p>Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">korban<\/span><em>)<\/em> that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering.<\/p>\n<p>Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span>) and was rarely reversed (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span> 5), for violation of a corban vow risked the severe consequences of divine judgment. In Mark 7 Jesus chastises the scribes because, theoretically, a son could exclude his parents from gaining any benefit from his estate by declaring his property “corban to them.” This in effect nullifies the fifth commandment (see Ex 20:12), setting rabbinic traditions against the law of Moses. Worse still, if the son repented of his vow—arguing that it had been given in haste—a rabbinic tribunal would no doubt forbid a reversal of corban (Mk 7:12; cf Nm 30:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"CORBAN* Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term (korban) that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering. Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, Nedarim) and was rarely revers...","summary_en":"CORBAN* Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term (korban) that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering. Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, Nedarim) and was rarely revers...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11984,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Family Life and Relations","title_en":"Family Life and Relations","content_ro":"<h3>FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refer to setting up a separate dwelling as well as establishing a family. In the broader sense, “house” may refer to an entire nation (“house of Israel”). The heads of families returning from Babylon in the postexilic period controlled sometimes several hundred family members (Ezr 8:1-14). The family was a smaller part of a clan and tribe. In nomadic times the responsibilities and allegiances centered on the larger family group.<\/p>\n<p>Those who belonged to the clan knew that they had to work for common interests and accept responsibility for the whole group. All members of the family were to be protected and assisted in time of need.<\/p>\n<p>As the life of the Israelites became more settled, families (in the wider sense of the term) lived in villages surrounded by fields of wheat, barley, and flax, with areas of grazing land for sheep and goats. Each group of villages consisted of an intermarried, interdependent family group, such as that of the Danites of Zorah and Eshtaol (Jgs 18:11). The hard life of those days demanded a sharing of work and the loyal cooperation of the entire family for survival.<\/p>\n<p>As crafts and trades developed, along with a more sedentary lifestyle, sons learned their fathers’ skills and continued the family trade. Consequently, the whole village might follow a particular craft (1 Chr 4:14; Neh 11:35). By specializing in such trades, however, the villagers became less self-sufficient, depending more on farmers for food and on other specialized villages for the production of cloth or pottery (1 Chr 4:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>With the growth of cities, related groups lived together in specific areas. Many members of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah were listed in the census of Jerusalem by Nehemiah (Neh 11:4-8), and by the writer of Chronicles (1 Chr 9:3-9). One consequence of life in the cities was the fragmentation of the family group. As the bonds of the wider family were loosened, the unit consisted increasingly of a husband and wife with their children, living in one house. The size of houses that have been excavated precludes the idea of any larger family unit as the norm in OT societies.<\/p>\n<p>During the kingdom period, King David’s sons Amnon and Absalom set up their own separate houses (2 Sm 13:7-8, 20). At that time there were few slaves in Hebrew society, but they also were considered members of the family. As bonds of the wider family loosened, and the master of the household lost a degree of authority, the society became one in which the king was sovereign and all the people were his subjects.<\/p>\n<p>The early kings of Israel promoted such a change in order to establish a central ruling authority for the entire country. The king’s subjects fell broadly into the categories of employers and employees, corresponding to the rich and poor of society. By the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, members of the wider family no longer worked for the communal good under the authority of the clan’s head; rather, individuals worked primarily for the good of their own immediate family. Hence one’s labor and devotion were focused more narrowly, and the greatest beneficiary was the king, the personal symbol of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>Emphasis on the smaller family unit increased, and old duties that had been willingly accepted by the wider groups in former times came to be neglected. People did not always help relatives in times of need, and they frequently had to be reminded of their obligations, particularly toward widows and orphans (Is 1:17; Jer 7:6). Family feuds also declined because members no longer felt responsible to take vengeance as a way to uphold the honor of the clan (2 Sm 3:27; 16:8; 2 Kgs 9:26). Nevertheless, Nehemiah expected Israelites to fight for their family honor (Neh 4:14). In NT times, the family was such a unit that it could be sold for a debt incurred by one of its members (Mt 18:25).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew religion’s emphasis on family participation in certain celebrations strengthened the small unit. The Passover, for example, was always celebrated as a family thanksgiving meal (Ex 12:3-4, 46). The prophet Samuel’s parents made a traditional annual pilgrimage to the shrine at Shiloh (1 Sm 2:19). In modern times, a young Jewish boy’s arrival at the threshold of manhood is celebrated with the Bar Mitzvah ceremony. Being so honored in the midst of a religious family preserves the ancient Hebrew tradition of family participation in religious ceremonies.<\/p>\n<p>In his preaching Jesus used the family as a symbol for the relationship of God to his people (Mt 19:14; 23:9; Lk 8:21). From the cross he handed over responsibility for the care of his mother to his disciple John (Jn 19:27).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times, the communion meals in the Jerusalem church took place by households (Acts 2:46). Early Christian meetings were held in the homes of believers because of opposition by the authorities. The book of Acts contains examples of entire families being converted to Christianity (Acts 10:24, 44-48; 16:15, 31-32). Timothy learned the gospel from his grandmother and mother (2 Tm 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>• Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>• Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>• The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>• Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>• In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"StatusofFamilyMembers\">Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>From nomadic times, a father’s authority held the family group together in their encampment, and he became the symbol of their security. In ancient patriarchal societies, the father was an absolute master who had the power of life and death over family members, ruling with unchallenged authority. Although he had extensive responsibilities for those under his care, his power was awesome and his status unquestioned.<\/p>\n<p>A man’s possessions included his wife, servants, slaves, and animals (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). In fact, the phrase “to marry a wife” comes from a Hebrew root meaning “to become the master of a wife.” A husband was as much the master of his wife as he was of his home or his fields. Consequently, the wife addressed him in a subservient manner, as a slave would address a master (Gn 18:12; Jgs 19:26). This low status for a woman extended to a daughter’s position in the ancient household. Females were always under the authority of a male relative: first, the father; then a husband. If a woman became a widow, she was subject to her husband’s nearest male relative, who became her “redeemer.” The bride price (Gn 29:18, 27; Ex 22:16-17; 1 Sm 18:25; 2 Sm 3:14) paid by her husband was not exactly a purchase of the woman from her father, but the exchange of money did stigmatize her. The amount of a bride price depended on the father’s status (Gn 34:12). The usual price was probably 20 to 30 shekels of silver. The bride received gifts of jewelry, ornaments, and clothing from her future husband, and she occasionally enjoyed some sort of financial or material return from the bride price for her own use (Jos 15:19; Jgs 1:15). When her father or husband died, the money frequently reverted to her.<\/p>\n<p>An engaged woman was considered her fiancé’s property just as much as if she were already married to him (Dt 22:23-27). The woman left her own family at marriage, to live with and become part of her new husband’s family. Normally, any succeeding marriages would be with members of that family.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the low legal status of the mother of the family, her life was not as bad as one might suppose. She was the legal wife, not an unpaid servant, and she frequently took a strong role as adviser to her husband in family affairs. Her most important function, aside from childbearing, was organization of the household, of which she was generally the respected manager. Even though the wife might have been acquired through capture in war (Dt 21:10-14), she could not be sold as a slave or daughter could (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5).<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, her position was precarious, in that she could be disowned or divorced by her husband as the result of a simple renunciation: “She is no longer my wife, and I am no longer her husband.” Perhaps he had found fault with her culinary skills, or possibly he was casting his eyes on another woman. In any event, a husband knew that if his wife did not obey even a signal or a glance, he was within his rights to obtain a divorce (cf. Ecclus 25:26). The wife, however, obtained a certain degree of protection in the letter of repudiation, by which her freedom was formally restored. Under Jewish tradition, a wife could not divorce her husband.<\/p>\n<p>In matters of domestic protocol, the Hebrew wife was not introduced to her husband’s guests, a tradition that subsequently led to considerable embarrassment for Abraham’s wife, Sarah, and for Rebekah (Gn 20:16). A woman normally remained veiled in public (24:65; 38:14; Is 47:2).<\/p>\n<p>The imagery in Proverbs 19:13 and 27:15 draws a vigorous comparison between a contentious woman and water dripping from a leaky roof. The OT leaves little doubt about the type of behavior expected from a woman. She was expected to be charming, soft-spoken, discreet, and calm (Prv 9:13; 11:16, 22; 21:9). She was also to be responsible, well-organized, intelligent, thoughtful, reverent, and a good manager of both the household and the family purse (31:10-31). A woman should also be pious and beautiful, and in NT tradition, submissive to her husband, as befitted a woman adorned with the priceless jewel of a gentle and quiet spirit (Ti 2:4-5; 1 Pt 3:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The actions of a few women whose roles in life do not seem to fit the pattern of the meek, passive female pictured above, are recorded in the Bible and the Apocrypha. The books of Judith and Esther recount heroic tales of how national fortunes were saved by women. Deborah and Jael were renowned heroines (Jgs 4–5), and the kingdom of Judah was ruled by a vicious woman, Athaliah, for several years (2 Kgs 11). The women who stepped to the forefront of public life were exceptional and few in number. Judith was a rich widow, an unusual thing in Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MaritalSecurity\">Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>The security of a wife’s position improved considerably when she produced her first child, particularly if it was a son. A woman’s primary duty to her husband and his family was procreation (Gn 1:28; 9:1), and until she gave birth to a son, she feared displacement by a second wife or a concubine. Polygamous marriages were by no means rare, especially in wealthy families. They resulted in two ill-defined family groups, controlled by the mothers but under the overall authority of fathers; there were inevitable jealousies and frictions.<\/p>\n<p>The legal status of a woman was consistently poor in Bible times. With no evidence at all, a husband could accuse his wife of adultery, and she was compelled to face a trial by ordeal. She had to abase herself by taking an oath, eating dust and a cereal offering, and drinking bitter water. A priest, meanwhile, made pronouncements regarding the dire results that would come to her if she were guilty: she would become an outcast with no hope of survival. But if she maintained her serenity, and if her thigh did not rot nor her abdomen swell, she was considered to have “proved” her innocence. In such an event she would go free, and her husband bore no blame whatsoever for his false accusation (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a woman took a vow, it was legal only as long as her father or husband approved it. If she became a widow, the vow still remained in force and could be used against her (Nm 30:3-15).<\/p>\n<p>A woman in Israel was always under the protection of a male, be it her father, grandfather, great-grandfather, brother, husband, or some other member of her husband’s family. She had few legal rights and, in contrast to Babylonian traditions, could not inherit at her husband’s death. It is small wonder that widows were classed with orphans and the poor. A childless widow could on occasion return to her father’s family (Gn 38:11; Lv 22:13; Ru 1:8), thus becoming subject again to the authority of her father. A Hebrew widow could also remain with her late husband’s family. She would then come under the protection of her “redeemer,” a male relative of her husband’s family who assumed responsibility for her. If a husband died leaving a woman childless, it was the responsibility of the husband’s brother to marry her. The first son born of such a union was then regarded as the heir of the first husband.<\/p>\n<p>It was normal for a brother to accept the obligation for such a marriage (levirate). It could be refused on various grounds, but such refusal was considered dishonorable, for it was a man’s duty to perpetuate his brother’s name and to safeguard the family fortune.<\/p>\n<p>A redeemer’s responsibilities were considerable. In addition to the marriage, he was perhaps involved in avenging the family reputation, and he had to ensure that family property increased and remained within family control.<\/p>\n<p>If an Israelite fell into debt and was forced to sell himself into slavery, he would normally be “redeemed” by one of his relatives (Lv 25:47-49). If in his penury an Israelite had to sell his land or his house, the redeemer had the right of first refusal over all other prospective purchasers. It was as much his duty as his right to prevent family property from passing into the hands of strangers (v 25). The prophet Jeremiah bought his cousin Hanamel’s field under similar circumstances (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar OT story of a childless widow, her “redeemer,” and their levirate marriage is recorded in the book of Ruth. One of Naomi’s two sons married Ruth. When Ruth was widowed, her impoverished mother-in-law, Naomi, left her home in Moab and returned to Bethlehem to sell some of the family property. Although a close relative was prepared to buy the land and keep it in the family, he was not ready to marry Ruth as well (Ru 3:12; 4:4). He knew that a son of that union would be deemed a son of the deceased, bearing the dead husband’s name, and thus ultimately inheriting the land (4:4-6). The next relative in order of kinship was Boaz, who became Ruth’s “redeemer.” He was prepared to accept the double obligation of purchasing the land and marrying Ruth (4:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PositionofChildren\">Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>Children were generally well loved, but their childhood was short and they were often regarded as laborers for the house or fields. According to the law of primogeniture, the eldest son received a double portion of the estate as his birthright (Dt 21:17). Thus, he was assured of the position of family head. Even during his father’s lifetime, the eldest son took precedence over his brothers and sisters (Gn 43:33). Where twins were born, the first to emerge from the womb was considered the elder, with all the attendant privileges (25:24-26; 38:27-30).<\/p>\n<p>For a serious offense, the eldest son could lose the right of primogeniture (Gn 35:22; 49:3-4; 1 Chr 5:1), or it could be surrendered voluntarily, as Esau did by selling his birthright to his brother Jacob (Gn 25:29-34). There was a law protecting the eldest son from his father’s favoritism for a younger brother (Dt 21:15-17). Nevertheless, King David gave his kingdom to Solomon, his youngest son (1 Kgs 2:15).<\/p>\n<p>In a family with no sons, a daughter could inherit property (Nm 27:8). Frequently, parents consulted neither sons nor daughters when marriage partners were arranged for them. Marriage was often an alliance or contract between two families, and thus the wishes and concerns of individuals were considered unimportant. Love matches were few, although occasionally a son would marry in defiance of his parents, as Esau did (Gn 26:34-35). Although it was rare for young people to express their feelings and preferences about marriage in an open fashion, Saul’s daughter, Michal, made known her love for David (1 Sm 18:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is no record of legal adoption among the Hebrews, but it was practiced from ancient times in Mesopotamia. It was especially useful as a means of ensuring a childless couple that their land would be tilled and that they would be cared for in their old age. All examples of adoption mentioned in the OT took place outside the land of Israel (Ex 2:10; 1 Kgs 11:20; Est 2:7, 15) and are not examples of true adoption as a lifetime member of a family.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRightsofChildren\">The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>The nature of patriarchal society made for unfortunate distinctions between male and female children. The position of a daughter, who could be sold into slavery or sold to be the concubine of a man and then possibly sold again (Ex 21:7-11), was certainly inferior to that of a son. In the patriarchal period, however, both a son and a daughter could be put to death for disobeying the head of the family. One’s children could also be sacrificed in worship rituals (see Gn 22; Jgs 11). It is probable that infant sacrifice was practiced by nations neighboring Israel, including Canaan and Ammon.<\/p>\n<p>The rights of children were improved considerably with the promulgation of the code of Mosaic law. A father was no longer permitted to put his child to death without referring the case to the elders (Dt 21:18-21). Both sons and daughters could be brought before such authorities and accused of being disobedient, gluttonous, or drunkards. A father’s absolute authority even extended to his married son and family if they were living under his roof. The law also prohibited children from being held responsible for the crimes of their parents (Dt 24:16). In King David’s time a person convicted by the community had the right of appeal to the king (2 Sm 14:4-11).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew families both parents were held in high respect. Honor had to be given to both mother and father (Ex 20:12), and the law condemned offenses against either parent (21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 21:18; 27:16). Respect due to the mother is a recurrent theme in the Wisdom Literature (Prv 19:26; 20:20; cf. Ecclus 3:1-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DailyLifeoftheHebrewFamily\">Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>In the everyday affairs of a Hebrew household, it was the father’s responsibility to maintain the family fortune and to be the provider. He might work in the fields, most probably with crops of flax, barley, or wheat. Or he would work at a trade, possibly as a weaver, builder, potter, dyer, fuller, or a worker in copper or bronze. If he lived near the shore, he might be a fisherman.<\/p>\n<p>The father was also responsible for the religious well-being of the family. It was his duty to take over his sons’ education from the mother at an early age, teaching them the tenets of Hebrew religion (Ex 10:2; 12:26; Dt 4:9; 6:7). He also explained all the facets of the law and the interwoven history of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the disciplinarian of the family, with the rod being used to drive home the lessons taught (Prv 13:24; 22:15; 29:15-17). Though children were loved and valued, they were not pampered (Ecclus 30:9-12). In postexilic times education also took place within the precincts of the synagogue, and shortly before the time of Christ, a general elementary education was introduced. It was also imperative that a father teach his sons a trade, normally his own, for a man without a trade either starved or became a thief. Another important paternal responsibility was to provide wives for male offspring in the household.<\/p>\n<p>The mother was responsible for her sons’ and daughters’ early education (Prv 1:8; 6:20), teaching them religious songs and prayers as soon as they could talk. A father took over the education of his sons, but the mother continued with the daughters, training them to spin, weave, cook, clean, trim the lamps, and generally to become competent in all the household duties (31:13-31).<\/p>\n<p>With little furniture, keeping a house clean meant sweeping the floors to keep them free from dust and dirt. Cooking was at once simple and difficult. It was simple in that much of the food was cooked in the form of a soup or stew, or else made into a cake and cooked on a griddle. It was difficult in that the corn had to be ground by hand and bread was baked daily.<\/p>\n<p>A mother was expected to take wool, card it, spin it, and often weave and make clothes for her family. In addition, she would help her husband in the fields at harvesttime. Because many families had one or more olive trees, a few grapevines, and fig trees, the mother would also assist in picking the fruit. She would sometimes work at the press when the olives or grapes were being processed. Frequently the treading of grapes in the family vat would be done together by husband and wife. Drawing water from the well was considered a menial task and was generally the wife’s responsibility, although sometimes it was assigned to the children (Gn 24:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>As in all societies, there was a time when children laughed and played together (Zec 8:5; Mt 11:16), although childhood and adolescence were not recognized as specific stages of development. Children were considered as sucklings if under three, but were regarded as boys or girls when they were able to take care of themselves. A small child sat on his mother’s lap and was played with (Is 66:12). There is no evidence of organized sports for children. Toys, including whistles, rattles, dolls, and miniature cooking utensils, have been excavated at Palestinian sites.<\/p>\n<p>As soon as a boy was old enough, he took his place in the family and accepted his appointed task. Among other things, children were expected to gather fuel (Jer 7:18). Young boys and girls tended the flocks. The sheep had to be protected from marauding wild beasts, guarded against their own folly when they wandered near crevices, steered toward good pasture and water, and carried home when sick or injured (Gn 29:6; Ex 2:16). The care of cattle was also the responsibility of children (1 Sm 16:11). Of necessity, boys were trained in the various arts of war.<\/p>\n<p>Children sometimes joined their fathers in the fields, and their presence was always welcome. From earliest times, boys in particular would watch their fathers until they too picked up a tool or implement to try their skill; girls watched and learned from their mothers. Young children frequently listened to the talk of the elders at the city gates or in the villages. A visit to a sanctuary at festival time was a family affair, furnishing an ideal learning experience. As a child, Jesus accompanied his parents, Mary and Joseph, to the temple in Jerusalem (Lk 2:42-47).<\/p>\n<p>Young girls were surprisingly free to go about their appointed tasks. They were not secluded or veiled and could visit uninhibited with friends and neighbors (Gn 34:1). They were also able to converse with men without embarrassment (24:15-25; 29:11-12; 1 Sm 9:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>Mealtimes were strictly family times. It is doubtful whether a meal comparable to a breakfast was eaten, and a farmer would probably have a light lunch in the fields. The main meal of the day was prepared by the mother, and it would be eaten in the early evening. Although the variety of food available was limited, its preparation was time-consuming.<\/p>\n<p>Feast times were periods of great religious significance and were also the days when family members participated in the symbolic rituals of their faith. Among the Israelites several kinds of food were fundamental to their religious ritual. Family unity and the national religion were molded together by special meals in the home.<\/p>\n<p>Daylight played an important part in the daily habits of the people in antiquity. Although oil lamps were readily available in later periods, it was customary to rise with the sun and go to bed relatively soon after dark. The wife would probably be up before sunrise and might continue her labor after dark.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InNewTestamentTimes\">In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, for those who followed the Greek and Roman style, life became more elegant. Despite that, the status of many family members did not change substantially. Wealthier families had more slaves, and the children were more likely to have formal education, sometimes spending less effort on family chores. Even in Roman times, however, the father still had a legal right to accept or reject his child.<\/p>\n<p>The status of the woman had definitely improved by the NT period. A Roman matron was highly respected and exerted a strong influence over her husband. She was not sequestered in a particular section of the house, as a Greek woman was, but managed and supervised tasks in any part of her home. She helped her husband in business, had her own place in theaters, games, and religious festivals, and sometimes managed her own property. Palestinian women began to enjoy a new status and dignity as the result of Jesus’ attitude toward women and its influence on the early Christian church.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Education; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Sex, Sexuality; Widow; Woman.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refer to setting up a separate dwelling as well as establishing a family. In the broader sense, “house” may refer to an entire nation (“house of Israel”). The heads of families returning from Babylon in the postexilic period controlled sometimes several hundred family members (Ezr 8:1-14). The family was a smaller part of a clan and tribe. In nomadic times the responsibilities and allegiances centered on the larger family group.<\/p>\n<p>Those who belonged to the clan knew that they had to work for common interests and accept responsibility for the whole group. All members of the family were to be protected and assisted in time of need.<\/p>\n<p>As the life of the Israelites became more settled, families (in the wider sense of the term) lived in villages surrounded by fields of wheat, barley, and flax, with areas of grazing land for sheep and goats. Each group of villages consisted of an intermarried, interdependent family group, such as that of the Danites of Zorah and Eshtaol (Jgs 18:11). The hard life of those days demanded a sharing of work and the loyal cooperation of the entire family for survival.<\/p>\n<p>As crafts and trades developed, along with a more sedentary lifestyle, sons learned their fathers’ skills and continued the family trade. Consequently, the whole village might follow a particular craft (1 Chr 4:14; Neh 11:35). By specializing in such trades, however, the villagers became less self-sufficient, depending more on farmers for food and on other specialized villages for the production of cloth or pottery (1 Chr 4:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>With the growth of cities, related groups lived together in specific areas. Many members of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah were listed in the census of Jerusalem by Nehemiah (Neh 11:4-8), and by the writer of Chronicles (1 Chr 9:3-9). One consequence of life in the cities was the fragmentation of the family group. As the bonds of the wider family were loosened, the unit consisted increasingly of a husband and wife with their children, living in one house. The size of houses that have been excavated precludes the idea of any larger family unit as the norm in OT societies.<\/p>\n<p>During the kingdom period, King David’s sons Amnon and Absalom set up their own separate houses (2 Sm 13:7-8, 20). At that time there were few slaves in Hebrew society, but they also were considered members of the family. As bonds of the wider family loosened, and the master of the household lost a degree of authority, the society became one in which the king was sovereign and all the people were his subjects.<\/p>\n<p>The early kings of Israel promoted such a change in order to establish a central ruling authority for the entire country. The king’s subjects fell broadly into the categories of employers and employees, corresponding to the rich and poor of society. By the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, members of the wider family no longer worked for the communal good under the authority of the clan’s head; rather, individuals worked primarily for the good of their own immediate family. Hence one’s labor and devotion were focused more narrowly, and the greatest beneficiary was the king, the personal symbol of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>Emphasis on the smaller family unit increased, and old duties that had been willingly accepted by the wider groups in former times came to be neglected. People did not always help relatives in times of need, and they frequently had to be reminded of their obligations, particularly toward widows and orphans (Is 1:17; Jer 7:6). Family feuds also declined because members no longer felt responsible to take vengeance as a way to uphold the honor of the clan (2 Sm 3:27; 16:8; 2 Kgs 9:26). Nevertheless, Nehemiah expected Israelites to fight for their family honor (Neh 4:14). In NT times, the family was such a unit that it could be sold for a debt incurred by one of its members (Mt 18:25).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew religion’s emphasis on family participation in certain celebrations strengthened the small unit. The Passover, for example, was always celebrated as a family thanksgiving meal (Ex 12:3-4, 46). The prophet Samuel’s parents made a traditional annual pilgrimage to the shrine at Shiloh (1 Sm 2:19). In modern times, a young Jewish boy’s arrival at the threshold of manhood is celebrated with the Bar Mitzvah ceremony. Being so honored in the midst of a religious family preserves the ancient Hebrew tradition of family participation in religious ceremonies.<\/p>\n<p>In his preaching Jesus used the family as a symbol for the relationship of God to his people (Mt 19:14; 23:9; Lk 8:21). From the cross he handed over responsibility for the care of his mother to his disciple John (Jn 19:27).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times, the communion meals in the Jerusalem church took place by households (Acts 2:46). Early Christian meetings were held in the homes of believers because of opposition by the authorities. The book of Acts contains examples of entire families being converted to Christianity (Acts 10:24, 44-48; 16:15, 31-32). Timothy learned the gospel from his grandmother and mother (2 Tm 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>• Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>• Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>• The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>• Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>• In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"StatusofFamilyMembers\">Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>From nomadic times, a father’s authority held the family group together in their encampment, and he became the symbol of their security. In ancient patriarchal societies, the father was an absolute master who had the power of life and death over family members, ruling with unchallenged authority. Although he had extensive responsibilities for those under his care, his power was awesome and his status unquestioned.<\/p>\n<p>A man’s possessions included his wife, servants, slaves, and animals (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). In fact, the phrase “to marry a wife” comes from a Hebrew root meaning “to become the master of a wife.” A husband was as much the master of his wife as he was of his home or his fields. Consequently, the wife addressed him in a subservient manner, as a slave would address a master (Gn 18:12; Jgs 19:26). This low status for a woman extended to a daughter’s position in the ancient household. Females were always under the authority of a male relative: first, the father; then a husband. If a woman became a widow, she was subject to her husband’s nearest male relative, who became her “redeemer.” The bride price (Gn 29:18, 27; Ex 22:16-17; 1 Sm 18:25; 2 Sm 3:14) paid by her husband was not exactly a purchase of the woman from her father, but the exchange of money did stigmatize her. The amount of a bride price depended on the father’s status (Gn 34:12). The usual price was probably 20 to 30 shekels of silver. The bride received gifts of jewelry, ornaments, and clothing from her future husband, and she occasionally enjoyed some sort of financial or material return from the bride price for her own use (Jos 15:19; Jgs 1:15). When her father or husband died, the money frequently reverted to her.<\/p>\n<p>An engaged woman was considered her fiancé’s property just as much as if she were already married to him (Dt 22:23-27). The woman left her own family at marriage, to live with and become part of her new husband’s family. Normally, any succeeding marriages would be with members of that family.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the low legal status of the mother of the family, her life was not as bad as one might suppose. She was the legal wife, not an unpaid servant, and she frequently took a strong role as adviser to her husband in family affairs. Her most important function, aside from childbearing, was organization of the household, of which she was generally the respected manager. Even though the wife might have been acquired through capture in war (Dt 21:10-14), she could not be sold as a slave or daughter could (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5).<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, her position was precarious, in that she could be disowned or divorced by her husband as the result of a simple renunciation: “She is no longer my wife, and I am no longer her husband.” Perhaps he had found fault with her culinary skills, or possibly he was casting his eyes on another woman. In any event, a husband knew that if his wife did not obey even a signal or a glance, he was within his rights to obtain a divorce (cf. Ecclus 25:26). The wife, however, obtained a certain degree of protection in the letter of repudiation, by which her freedom was formally restored. Under Jewish tradition, a wife could not divorce her husband.<\/p>\n<p>In matters of domestic protocol, the Hebrew wife was not introduced to her husband’s guests, a tradition that subsequently led to considerable embarrassment for Abraham’s wife, Sarah, and for Rebekah (Gn 20:16). A woman normally remained veiled in public (24:65; 38:14; Is 47:2).<\/p>\n<p>The imagery in Proverbs 19:13 and 27:15 draws a vigorous comparison between a contentious woman and water dripping from a leaky roof. The OT leaves little doubt about the type of behavior expected from a woman. She was expected to be charming, soft-spoken, discreet, and calm (Prv 9:13; 11:16, 22; 21:9). She was also to be responsible, well-organized, intelligent, thoughtful, reverent, and a good manager of both the household and the family purse (31:10-31). A woman should also be pious and beautiful, and in NT tradition, submissive to her husband, as befitted a woman adorned with the priceless jewel of a gentle and quiet spirit (Ti 2:4-5; 1 Pt 3:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The actions of a few women whose roles in life do not seem to fit the pattern of the meek, passive female pictured above, are recorded in the Bible and the Apocrypha. The books of Judith and Esther recount heroic tales of how national fortunes were saved by women. Deborah and Jael were renowned heroines (Jgs 4–5), and the kingdom of Judah was ruled by a vicious woman, Athaliah, for several years (2 Kgs 11). The women who stepped to the forefront of public life were exceptional and few in number. Judith was a rich widow, an unusual thing in Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MaritalSecurity\">Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>The security of a wife’s position improved considerably when she produced her first child, particularly if it was a son. A woman’s primary duty to her husband and his family was procreation (Gn 1:28; 9:1), and until she gave birth to a son, she feared displacement by a second wife or a concubine. Polygamous marriages were by no means rare, especially in wealthy families. They resulted in two ill-defined family groups, controlled by the mothers but under the overall authority of fathers; there were inevitable jealousies and frictions.<\/p>\n<p>The legal status of a woman was consistently poor in Bible times. With no evidence at all, a husband could accuse his wife of adultery, and she was compelled to face a trial by ordeal. She had to abase herself by taking an oath, eating dust and a cereal offering, and drinking bitter water. A priest, meanwhile, made pronouncements regarding the dire results that would come to her if she were guilty: she would become an outcast with no hope of survival. But if she maintained her serenity, and if her thigh did not rot nor her abdomen swell, she was considered to have “proved” her innocence. In such an event she would go free, and her husband bore no blame whatsoever for his false accusation (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a woman took a vow, it was legal only as long as her father or husband approved it. If she became a widow, the vow still remained in force and could be used against her (Nm 30:3-15).<\/p>\n<p>A woman in Israel was always under the protection of a male, be it her father, grandfather, great-grandfather, brother, husband, or some other member of her husband’s family. She had few legal rights and, in contrast to Babylonian traditions, could not inherit at her husband’s death. It is small wonder that widows were classed with orphans and the poor. A childless widow could on occasion return to her father’s family (Gn 38:11; Lv 22:13; Ru 1:8), thus becoming subject again to the authority of her father. A Hebrew widow could also remain with her late husband’s family. She would then come under the protection of her “redeemer,” a male relative of her husband’s family who assumed responsibility for her. If a husband died leaving a woman childless, it was the responsibility of the husband’s brother to marry her. The first son born of such a union was then regarded as the heir of the first husband.<\/p>\n<p>It was normal for a brother to accept the obligation for such a marriage (levirate). It could be refused on various grounds, but such refusal was considered dishonorable, for it was a man’s duty to perpetuate his brother’s name and to safeguard the family fortune.<\/p>\n<p>A redeemer’s responsibilities were considerable. In addition to the marriage, he was perhaps involved in avenging the family reputation, and he had to ensure that family property increased and remained within family control.<\/p>\n<p>If an Israelite fell into debt and was forced to sell himself into slavery, he would normally be “redeemed” by one of his relatives (Lv 25:47-49). If in his penury an Israelite had to sell his land or his house, the redeemer had the right of first refusal over all other prospective purchasers. It was as much his duty as his right to prevent family property from passing into the hands of strangers (v 25). The prophet Jeremiah bought his cousin Hanamel’s field under similar circumstances (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar OT story of a childless widow, her “redeemer,” and their levirate marriage is recorded in the book of Ruth. One of Naomi’s two sons married Ruth. When Ruth was widowed, her impoverished mother-in-law, Naomi, left her home in Moab and returned to Bethlehem to sell some of the family property. Although a close relative was prepared to buy the land and keep it in the family, he was not ready to marry Ruth as well (Ru 3:12; 4:4). He knew that a son of that union would be deemed a son of the deceased, bearing the dead husband’s name, and thus ultimately inheriting the land (4:4-6). The next relative in order of kinship was Boaz, who became Ruth’s “redeemer.” He was prepared to accept the double obligation of purchasing the land and marrying Ruth (4:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PositionofChildren\">Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>Children were generally well loved, but their childhood was short and they were often regarded as laborers for the house or fields. According to the law of primogeniture, the eldest son received a double portion of the estate as his birthright (Dt 21:17). Thus, he was assured of the position of family head. Even during his father’s lifetime, the eldest son took precedence over his brothers and sisters (Gn 43:33). Where twins were born, the first to emerge from the womb was considered the elder, with all the attendant privileges (25:24-26; 38:27-30).<\/p>\n<p>For a serious offense, the eldest son could lose the right of primogeniture (Gn 35:22; 49:3-4; 1 Chr 5:1), or it could be surrendered voluntarily, as Esau did by selling his birthright to his brother Jacob (Gn 25:29-34). There was a law protecting the eldest son from his father’s favoritism for a younger brother (Dt 21:15-17). Nevertheless, King David gave his kingdom to Solomon, his youngest son (1 Kgs 2:15).<\/p>\n<p>In a family with no sons, a daughter could inherit property (Nm 27:8). Frequently, parents consulted neither sons nor daughters when marriage partners were arranged for them. Marriage was often an alliance or contract between two families, and thus the wishes and concerns of individuals were considered unimportant. Love matches were few, although occasionally a son would marry in defiance of his parents, as Esau did (Gn 26:34-35). Although it was rare for young people to express their feelings and preferences about marriage in an open fashion, Saul’s daughter, Michal, made known her love for David (1 Sm 18:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is no record of legal adoption among the Hebrews, but it was practiced from ancient times in Mesopotamia. It was especially useful as a means of ensuring a childless couple that their land would be tilled and that they would be cared for in their old age. All examples of adoption mentioned in the OT took place outside the land of Israel (Ex 2:10; 1 Kgs 11:20; Est 2:7, 15) and are not examples of true adoption as a lifetime member of a family.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRightsofChildren\">The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>The nature of patriarchal society made for unfortunate distinctions between male and female children. The position of a daughter, who could be sold into slavery or sold to be the concubine of a man and then possibly sold again (Ex 21:7-11), was certainly inferior to that of a son. In the patriarchal period, however, both a son and a daughter could be put to death for disobeying the head of the family. One’s children could also be sacrificed in worship rituals (see Gn 22; Jgs 11). It is probable that infant sacrifice was practiced by nations neighboring Israel, including Canaan and Ammon.<\/p>\n<p>The rights of children were improved considerably with the promulgation of the code of Mosaic law. A father was no longer permitted to put his child to death without referring the case to the elders (Dt 21:18-21). Both sons and daughters could be brought before such authorities and accused of being disobedient, gluttonous, or drunkards. A father’s absolute authority even extended to his married son and family if they were living under his roof. The law also prohibited children from being held responsible for the crimes of their parents (Dt 24:16). In King David’s time a person convicted by the community had the right of appeal to the king (2 Sm 14:4-11).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew families both parents were held in high respect. Honor had to be given to both mother and father (Ex 20:12), and the law condemned offenses against either parent (21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 21:18; 27:16). Respect due to the mother is a recurrent theme in the Wisdom Literature (Prv 19:26; 20:20; cf. Ecclus 3:1-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DailyLifeoftheHebrewFamily\">Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>In the everyday affairs of a Hebrew household, it was the father’s responsibility to maintain the family fortune and to be the provider. He might work in the fields, most probably with crops of flax, barley, or wheat. Or he would work at a trade, possibly as a weaver, builder, potter, dyer, fuller, or a worker in copper or bronze. If he lived near the shore, he might be a fisherman.<\/p>\n<p>The father was also responsible for the religious well-being of the family. It was his duty to take over his sons’ education from the mother at an early age, teaching them the tenets of Hebrew religion (Ex 10:2; 12:26; Dt 4:9; 6:7). He also explained all the facets of the law and the interwoven history of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the disciplinarian of the family, with the rod being used to drive home the lessons taught (Prv 13:24; 22:15; 29:15-17). Though children were loved and valued, they were not pampered (Ecclus 30:9-12). In postexilic times education also took place within the precincts of the synagogue, and shortly before the time of Christ, a general elementary education was introduced. It was also imperative that a father teach his sons a trade, normally his own, for a man without a trade either starved or became a thief. Another important paternal responsibility was to provide wives for male offspring in the household.<\/p>\n<p>The mother was responsible for her sons’ and daughters’ early education (Prv 1:8; 6:20), teaching them religious songs and prayers as soon as they could talk. A father took over the education of his sons, but the mother continued with the daughters, training them to spin, weave, cook, clean, trim the lamps, and generally to become competent in all the household duties (31:13-31).<\/p>\n<p>With little furniture, keeping a house clean meant sweeping the floors to keep them free from dust and dirt. Cooking was at once simple and difficult. It was simple in that much of the food was cooked in the form of a soup or stew, or else made into a cake and cooked on a griddle. It was difficult in that the corn had to be ground by hand and bread was baked daily.<\/p>\n<p>A mother was expected to take wool, card it, spin it, and often weave and make clothes for her family. In addition, she would help her husband in the fields at harvesttime. Because many families had one or more olive trees, a few grapevines, and fig trees, the mother would also assist in picking the fruit. She would sometimes work at the press when the olives or grapes were being processed. Frequently the treading of grapes in the family vat would be done together by husband and wife. Drawing water from the well was considered a menial task and was generally the wife’s responsibility, although sometimes it was assigned to the children (Gn 24:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>As in all societies, there was a time when children laughed and played together (Zec 8:5; Mt 11:16), although childhood and adolescence were not recognized as specific stages of development. Children were considered as sucklings if under three, but were regarded as boys or girls when they were able to take care of themselves. A small child sat on his mother’s lap and was played with (Is 66:12). There is no evidence of organized sports for children. Toys, including whistles, rattles, dolls, and miniature cooking utensils, have been excavated at Palestinian sites.<\/p>\n<p>As soon as a boy was old enough, he took his place in the family and accepted his appointed task. Among other things, children were expected to gather fuel (Jer 7:18). Young boys and girls tended the flocks. The sheep had to be protected from marauding wild beasts, guarded against their own folly when they wandered near crevices, steered toward good pasture and water, and carried home when sick or injured (Gn 29:6; Ex 2:16). The care of cattle was also the responsibility of children (1 Sm 16:11). Of necessity, boys were trained in the various arts of war.<\/p>\n<p>Children sometimes joined their fathers in the fields, and their presence was always welcome. From earliest times, boys in particular would watch their fathers until they too picked up a tool or implement to try their skill; girls watched and learned from their mothers. Young children frequently listened to the talk of the elders at the city gates or in the villages. A visit to a sanctuary at festival time was a family affair, furnishing an ideal learning experience. As a child, Jesus accompanied his parents, Mary and Joseph, to the temple in Jerusalem (Lk 2:42-47).<\/p>\n<p>Young girls were surprisingly free to go about their appointed tasks. They were not secluded or veiled and could visit uninhibited with friends and neighbors (Gn 34:1). They were also able to converse with men without embarrassment (24:15-25; 29:11-12; 1 Sm 9:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>Mealtimes were strictly family times. It is doubtful whether a meal comparable to a breakfast was eaten, and a farmer would probably have a light lunch in the fields. The main meal of the day was prepared by the mother, and it would be eaten in the early evening. Although the variety of food available was limited, its preparation was time-consuming.<\/p>\n<p>Feast times were periods of great religious significance and were also the days when family members participated in the symbolic rituals of their faith. Among the Israelites several kinds of food were fundamental to their religious ritual. Family unity and the national religion were molded together by special meals in the home.<\/p>\n<p>Daylight played an important part in the daily habits of the people in antiquity. Although oil lamps were readily available in later periods, it was customary to rise with the sun and go to bed relatively soon after dark. The wife would probably be up before sunrise and might continue her labor after dark.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InNewTestamentTimes\">In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, for those who followed the Greek and Roman style, life became more elegant. Despite that, the status of many family members did not change substantially. Wealthier families had more slaves, and the children were more likely to have formal education, sometimes spending less effort on family chores. Even in Roman times, however, the father still had a legal right to accept or reject his child.<\/p>\n<p>The status of the woman had definitely improved by the NT period. A Roman matron was highly respected and exerted a strong influence over her husband. She was not sequestered in a particular section of the house, as a Greek woman was, but managed and supervised tasks in any part of her home. She helped her husband in business, had her own place in theaters, games, and religious festivals, and sometimes managed her own property. Palestinian women began to enjoy a new status and dignity as the result of Jesus’ attitude toward women and its influence on the early Christian church.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Education; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Sex, Sexuality; Widow; Woman.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refe...","summary_en":"FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refe...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16608,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Honor","title_en":"Honor","content_ro":"<h3>HONOR<\/h3>\n<p>Good reputation, respect, purity, integrity.<\/p>\n<p>To the ancient world, the concept of honor was frequently linked to one’s tangible possessions. The honor of Odysseus was bound up with the restoration of his material goods; Achilles’ honor was dependent upon the gifts given him. Later, the word acquired the strong ethical nature we now associate with it. Plato was among the earliest to establish the personal moral element of honor, what he called “inward honor.” The distinctions accorded a man by the world—“outward honors”—were not of the same value as a virtuous person’s inner worth. The Romans as well as the Greeks placed great emphasis on the indispensable role of honor in an individual’s life.<\/p>\n<p>Only in the Bible, however, do we gain a true perspective on honor. The OT required children to honor their parents (Ex 20:12), a command that reappears in the ethic of the NT (Eph 6:1-2). Undergirding such action is an even more basic obligation: the giving of honor to God, who worthily merits our devoted obedience (Rv 4:11). Proverbs 3:9 presents the law’s requirement that one should honor the Lord with his gifts and with the firstfruits of his entire harvest. Honoring God, then, is expressed in the commitment of both life and possessions to the Lord’s service.<\/p>\n<p>That people do not honor God as they should is a lamentable truth of Scripture. In all of history only Jesus Christ truly honored the Father by submitting himself totally to the divine will. His submission led him to the cross, the means whereby Christ is now extremely exalted (Is 52:13–53:12). God the Father raised Christ to his permanent position as our great High Priest, an honor of incalculable significance (Heb 5:4-5). Jesus taught that the one who serves him would also be honored by his Father (Jn 12:26); conversely, those who reject him also reject God the Father (15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Christians are called upon to honor one another—that is, each is to consider his fellow believer more worthy of esteem than himself (Rom 12:10). This orientation receives impetus from the affirmation of 1 Peter 1:7, where Christians are said to possess honor. Showing honor to others should affect one’s entire lifestyle. Husbands are to give honor to their wives by showing loving regard for them (1 Pt 3:7). Christian servants are expected to show honor to their masters so as to affirm the cause of Christ (1 Tm 6:1). Beyond the immediate community of the redeemed, too, honor must be appropriately displayed by all those who revere the teaching of Scripture (Rom 13:7; 1 Pt 2:17).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HONOR<\/h3>\n<p>Good reputation, respect, purity, integrity.<\/p>\n<p>To the ancient world, the concept of honor was frequently linked to one’s tangible possessions. The honor of Odysseus was bound up with the restoration of his material goods; Achilles’ honor was dependent upon the gifts given him. Later, the word acquired the strong ethical nature we now associate with it. Plato was among the earliest to establish the personal moral element of honor, what he called “inward honor.” The distinctions accorded a man by the world—“outward honors”—were not of the same value as a virtuous person’s inner worth. The Romans as well as the Greeks placed great emphasis on the indispensable role of honor in an individual’s life.<\/p>\n<p>Only in the Bible, however, do we gain a true perspective on honor. The OT required children to honor their parents (Ex 20:12), a command that reappears in the ethic of the NT (Eph 6:1-2). Undergirding such action is an even more basic obligation: the giving of honor to God, who worthily merits our devoted obedience (Rv 4:11). Proverbs 3:9 presents the law’s requirement that one should honor the Lord with his gifts and with the firstfruits of his entire harvest. Honoring God, then, is expressed in the commitment of both life and possessions to the Lord’s service.<\/p>\n<p>That people do not honor God as they should is a lamentable truth of Scripture. In all of history only Jesus Christ truly honored the Father by submitting himself totally to the divine will. His submission led him to the cross, the means whereby Christ is now extremely exalted (Is 52:13–53:12). God the Father raised Christ to his permanent position as our great High Priest, an honor of incalculable significance (Heb 5:4-5). Jesus taught that the one who serves him would also be honored by his Father (Jn 12:26); conversely, those who reject him also reject God the Father (15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Christians are called upon to honor one another—that is, each is to consider his fellow believer more worthy of esteem than himself (Rom 12:10). This orientation receives impetus from the affirmation of 1 Peter 1:7, where Christians are said to possess honor. Showing honor to others should affect one’s entire lifestyle. Husbands are to give honor to their wives by showing loving regard for them (1 Pt 3:7). Christian servants are expected to show honor to their masters so as to affirm the cause of Christ (1 Tm 6:1). Beyond the immediate community of the redeemed, too, honor must be appropriately displayed by all those who revere the teaching of Scripture (Rom 13:7; 1 Pt 2:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HONOR Good reputation, respect, purity, integrity. To the ancient world, the concept of honor was frequently linked to one’s tangible possessions. The honor of Odysseus was bound up with the restoration of his material goods; Achilles’ honor was dependent upon the gifts given him. Later, the word acquired the strong ethical nature we now associate with it. Plato was among the earliest to establish the personal moral element of honor, what he called “inward honor.” The distinctions accorded a ...","summary_en":"HONOR Good reputation, respect, purity, integrity. To the ancient world, the concept of honor was frequently linked to one’s tangible possessions. The honor of Odysseus was bound up with the restoration of his material goods; Achilles’ honor was dependent upon the gifts given him. Later, the word acquired the strong ethical nature we now associate with it. Plato was among the earliest to establish the personal moral element of honor, what he called “inward honor.” The distinctions accorded a ...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32237,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Queen","title_en":"Queen","content_ro":"<h3>QUEEN<\/h3>\n<p>Word used to describe a reigning monarch, a queen consort, or a queen mother. The queen of Sheba became the epitome of wealth at the time of her visit to the luxurious court of King Solomon (1 Kgs 10:1; Mt 12:42; Lk 11:31), when she arrived with a large retinue and camels bearing gold, jewels, and spices. Candace, queen of Ethiopia, is mentioned when a eunuch, a senior minister in her court, is converted by Philip while on a visit to Jerusalem (Acts 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>In Jewish history, Athaliah, thinking that she had murdered all rival claimants to the throne within the royal family, reigned for six years (2 Kgs 11:3). Also, Salome Alexandra succeeded her husband, Alexander Janneus, as ruler from 76 to 67 <span>BC<\/span>. A queen consort normally played a minor role, although Bathsheba (1 Kgs 1:15-31), who was determined to ensure the succession of her son, and Jezebel (ch 21), who plotted the false accusation leading to the death of Naboth, are notable exceptions. The powerful role was that of queen mother. She not only ruled over the royal household but also was held in respect both by the court and by the monarch (cf. Ex 20:12). Her requests were unlikely to be denied (1 Kgs 2:20). As the mother of the king, she was unique, whereas his wives might share their position with several others. Maacah, queen mother of Abijam, even retained her authority during much of her grandson’s reign (1 Kgs 15:2, 10, 13; 2 Chr 15:16). The queen mother was crowned (Jer 13:18), and Bathsheba, powerful enough as queen, was seated at the right hand of King Solomon when she became queen mother (1 Kgs 2:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>QUEEN<\/h3>\n<p>Word used to describe a reigning monarch, a queen consort, or a queen mother. The queen of Sheba became the epitome of wealth at the time of her visit to the luxurious court of King Solomon (1 Kgs 10:1; Mt 12:42; Lk 11:31), when she arrived with a large retinue and camels bearing gold, jewels, and spices. Candace, queen of Ethiopia, is mentioned when a eunuch, a senior minister in her court, is converted by Philip while on a visit to Jerusalem (Acts 8:27).<\/p>\n<p>In Jewish history, Athaliah, thinking that she had murdered all rival claimants to the throne within the royal family, reigned for six years (2 Kgs 11:3). Also, Salome Alexandra succeeded her husband, Alexander Janneus, as ruler from 76 to 67 <span>BC<\/span>. A queen consort normally played a minor role, although Bathsheba (1 Kgs 1:15-31), who was determined to ensure the succession of her son, and Jezebel (ch 21), who plotted the false accusation leading to the death of Naboth, are notable exceptions. The powerful role was that of queen mother. She not only ruled over the royal household but also was held in respect both by the court and by the monarch (cf. Ex 20:12). Her requests were unlikely to be denied (1 Kgs 2:20). As the mother of the king, she was unique, whereas his wives might share their position with several others. Maacah, queen mother of Abijam, even retained her authority during much of her grandson’s reign (1 Kgs 15:2, 10, 13; 2 Chr 15:16). The queen mother was crowned (Jer 13:18), and Bathsheba, powerful enough as queen, was seated at the right hand of King Solomon when she became queen mother (1 Kgs 2:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"QUEEN Word used to describe a reigning monarch, a queen consort, or a queen mother. The queen of Sheba became the epitome of wealth at the time of her visit to the luxurious court of King Solomon (1 Kgs 10:1; Mt 12:42; Lk 11:31), when she arrived with a large retinue and camels bearing gold, jewels, and spices. Candace, queen of Ethiopia, is mentioned when a eunuch, a senior minister in her court, is converted by Philip while on a visit to Jerusalem (Acts 8:27). In Jewish history, Athaliah, t...","summary_en":"QUEEN Word used to describe a reigning monarch, a queen consort, or a queen mother. The queen of Sheba became the epitome of wealth at the time of her visit to the luxurious court of King Solomon (1 Kgs 10:1; Mt 12:42; Lk 11:31), when she arrived with a large retinue and camels bearing gold, jewels, and spices. Candace, queen of Ethiopia, is mentioned when a eunuch, a senior minister in her court, is converted by Philip while on a visit to Jerusalem (Acts 8:27). In Jewish history, Athaliah, t...","source":"Articles\/Q.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43845,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:12","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:12-17<\/strong> The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethical and untrustworthy, unlike the God of Israel, whose people worship him by treating others as he does. See also Matt 19:17-19.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:12-17<\/strong> The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethical and untrustworthy, unlike the God of Israel, whose people worship him by treating others as he does. See also Matt 19:17-19.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:12-17 The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethic...","summary_en":"20:12-17 The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethic...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43846,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:12","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:12<\/strong> To <em>honor your father and mother<\/em> is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a <em>long, full life<\/em>. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:12<\/strong> To <em>honor your father and mother<\/em> is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a <em>long, full life<\/em>. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:12 To honor your father and mother is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a long, full life. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).","summary_en":"20:12 To honor your father and mother is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a long, full life. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71471,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:12","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:12-17<\/strong> The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethical and untrustworthy, unlike the God of Israel, whose people worship him by treating others as he does. See also Matt 19:17-19.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:12-17<\/strong> The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethical and untrustworthy, unlike the God of Israel, whose people worship him by treating others as he does. See also Matt 19:17-19.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:12-17 The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethic...","summary_en":"20:12-17 The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethic...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71472,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:12","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:12<\/strong> To <em>honor your father and mother<\/em> is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a <em>long, full life<\/em>. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:12<\/strong> To <em>honor your father and mother<\/em> is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a <em>long, full life<\/em>. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:12 To honor your father and mother is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a long, full life. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).","summary_en":"20:12 To honor your father and mother is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a long, full life. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99097,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:12","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:12-17<\/strong> The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethical and untrustworthy, unlike the God of Israel, whose people worship him by treating others as he does. See also Matt 19:17-19.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:12-17<\/strong> The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethical and untrustworthy, unlike the God of Israel, whose people worship him by treating others as he does. See also Matt 19:17-19.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:12-17 The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethic...","summary_en":"20:12-17 The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethic...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99098,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:12","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:12<\/strong> To <em>honor your father and mother<\/em> is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a <em>long, full life<\/em>. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:12<\/strong> To <em>honor your father and mother<\/em> is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a <em>long, full life<\/em>. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:12 To honor your father and mother is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a long, full life. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).","summary_en":"20:12 To honor your father and mother is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a long, full life. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126723,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:12","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:12-17<\/strong> The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethical and untrustworthy, unlike the God of Israel, whose people worship him by treating others as he does. See also Matt 19:17-19.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:12-17<\/strong> The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethical and untrustworthy, unlike the God of Israel, whose people worship him by treating others as he does. See also Matt 19:17-19.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:12-17 The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethic...","summary_en":"20:12-17 The remaining six instructions all have to do with human relationships. Many of the stipulations of the covenant with God relate to how people treat each other. This connection of ethical behavior with religious duty is unique in the Old Testament world. There are several ethical law codes known in the ancient Near East, and several of these predate Moses, but all of them are imposed by a human king and have little to do with religion. The pagan gods, meanwhile, were patently unethic...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126724,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:12","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:12<\/strong> To <em>honor your father and mother<\/em> is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a <em>long, full life<\/em>. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:12<\/strong> To <em>honor your father and mother<\/em> is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a <em>long, full life<\/em>. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:12 To honor your father and mother is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a long, full life. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).","summary_en":"20:12 To honor your father and mother is to recognize that you are not self-sufficient and self-existent. This is one important step on the road to humility. Arrogance may produce notoriety, but humility and gratitude are the foundations of a long, full life. Both Jesus and Paul refer to this command (see Matt 15:4; Mark 7:10; Eph 6:1-3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":7290,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandments, the Ten","title_en":"Commandments, the Ten","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8058,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","title_en":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","content_ro":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<p>• Punishment<\/p>\n<p>• Conclusion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NearEasternContext\">Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>In ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\n<p>Conclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewCriminalLaw\">Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\n<p>Since Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Any type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\n<p>Murder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Kidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>Injuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\n<p>Negligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\n<p>In ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\n<p>Adultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>In a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\n<p>Little emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\n<p>The Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\n<p>A number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\n<p>Some Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Sorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Punishment\">Punishment<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Many forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n<p>1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\n<p>Before a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\n<p>In offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\n<p>The Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\n<p>Citizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 <span>BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\n<p>The Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Capital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n<p>1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\n<p>Usually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 <span>BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 <span>BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\n<p>Three types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\n<p>The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<p>• Punishment<\/p>\n<p>• Conclusion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NearEasternContext\">Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n<p>In ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\n<p>Conclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HebrewCriminalLaw\">Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\n<p>Since Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Any type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\n<p>Murder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, <span>nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p>In the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Kidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\n<p>Injuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\n<p>Negligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\n<p>In ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\n<p>Adultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>In a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\n<p>Little emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\n<p>The Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\n<p>A number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\n<p>Some Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Sorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Punishment\">Punishment<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Many forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n<p>1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\n<p>Before a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\n<p>In offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\n<p>The Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\n<p>Citizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 <span>BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\n<p>The Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\n<p>Capital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n<p>1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\n<p>Usually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 <span>BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 <span>BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\n<p>Three types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","summary_en":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32297,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Raca*","title_en":"Raca*","content_ro":"<h3>RACA*<\/h3>\n<p>Derogatory expression used by Jews of the first century <span>AD<\/span> to show open contempt for another. <em>Raca<\/em> is derived from an Aramaic and Hebrew term meaning “empty” or “worthless.” Literally meaning “empty-headed,” <em>raca<\/em> probably insinuates an intellectual stupidity or inferiority rather than a moral deficiency. In the OT it is comparable to the worthless lot that Abimelech hired to follow him (Jgs 9:4), the idle men who gathered around Jephthah (11:3), and the scoundrels who joined up with Jeroboam (2 Chr 13:7). Michal accused David of acting like one of the vulgar fellows [<em>raca<\/em>] who shamelessly uncovered himself (2 Sm 6:20). Rabbinic literature used this term to describe an immoral, untrained person.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus warned against calling a brother <em>“Raca!”<\/em> (Mt 5:22, <span>nlt<\/span> mg). According to Jesus, the perpetrator of the insult was to be judged by the highest court of the land and punished by its severest penalty. The commandment against murder (Ex 20:13) not only prohibited the deed itself but also the thoughts of unrighteous anger and expressions of unwarranted contempt.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RACA*<\/h3>\n<p>Derogatory expression used by Jews of the first century <span>AD<\/span> to show open contempt for another. <em>Raca<\/em> is derived from an Aramaic and Hebrew term meaning “empty” or “worthless.” Literally meaning “empty-headed,” <em>raca<\/em> probably insinuates an intellectual stupidity or inferiority rather than a moral deficiency. In the OT it is comparable to the worthless lot that Abimelech hired to follow him (Jgs 9:4), the idle men who gathered around Jephthah (11:3), and the scoundrels who joined up with Jeroboam (2 Chr 13:7). Michal accused David of acting like one of the vulgar fellows [<em>raca<\/em>] who shamelessly uncovered himself (2 Sm 6:20). Rabbinic literature used this term to describe an immoral, untrained person.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus warned against calling a brother <em>“Raca!”<\/em> (Mt 5:22, <span>nlt<\/span> mg). According to Jesus, the perpetrator of the insult was to be judged by the highest court of the land and punished by its severest penalty. The commandment against murder (Ex 20:13) not only prohibited the deed itself but also the thoughts of unrighteous anger and expressions of unwarranted contempt.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RACA* Derogatory expression used by Jews of the first century AD to show open contempt for another. Raca is derived from an Aramaic and Hebrew term meaning “empty” or “worthless.” Literally meaning “empty-headed,” raca probably insinuates an intellectual stupidity or inferiority rather than a moral deficiency. In the OT it is comparable to the worthless lot that Abimelech hired to follow him (Jgs 9:4), the idle men who gathered around Jephthah (11:3), and the scoundrels who joined up with Jer...","summary_en":"RACA* Derogatory expression used by Jews of the first century AD to show open contempt for another. Raca is derived from an Aramaic and Hebrew term meaning “empty” or “worthless.” Literally meaning “empty-headed,” raca probably insinuates an intellectual stupidity or inferiority rather than a moral deficiency. In the OT it is comparable to the worthless lot that Abimelech hired to follow him (Jgs 9:4), the idle men who gathered around Jephthah (11:3), and the scoundrels who joined up with Jer...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43847,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:13","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:13<\/strong> <em>murder:<\/em> This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:13<\/strong> <em>murder:<\/em> This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:13 murder: This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.","summary_en":"20:13 murder: This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71473,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:13","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:13<\/strong> <em>murder:<\/em> This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:13<\/strong> <em>murder:<\/em> This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:13 murder: This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.","summary_en":"20:13 murder: This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99099,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:13","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:13<\/strong> <em>murder:<\/em> This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:13<\/strong> <em>murder:<\/em> This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:13 murder: This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.","summary_en":"20:13 murder: This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126725,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:13","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:13<\/strong> <em>murder:<\/em> This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:13<\/strong> <em>murder:<\/em> This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:13 murder: This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.","summary_en":"20:13 murder: This is the correct rendering of the Hebrew word. There is another word that connotes mere killing. Taking human life is not prohibited, per se, but the intentional killing of another for personal reasons is prohibited. This principle tells us that God values our individual, physical lives. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:21-26.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":679,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Adultery","title_en":"Adultery","content_ro":"<h3>ADULTERY<\/h3>\n<p>A breach of the unity of marriage. It describes any act of sexual intercourse between a married woman and a man other than her husband, and all sexual intercourse involving a married man and a woman other than his wife.<\/p>\n<p>In OT times, polygamous unions were not considered adulterous (cf. Dt 21:15). Nor was a husband branded as an adulterer if he had intercourse with a slave woman (Gn 16:1-4; 30:1-5) or a prostitute (Gn 38:15-18)—though the latter was, of course, condemned as immoral (1 Cor 6:15).<\/p>\n<p>Any imbalance between the sexes was dispelled by Jesus in his teaching on divorce and remarriage. While he did not rule out the possibility of divorce in cases of sexual unfaithfulness (Mt 5:32; 19:9), he warned that in all other circumstances remarriage involves both (ex-)husband and (ex-)wife in adultery. Paul added that the charge of adultery only applies if the remarried person’s original partner is still alive (Rom 7:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also sharpened the OT’s definition of adultery by applying it to a man’s thought life. Any man who fantasizes in lust (as distinct from just being tempted) has committed adultery in mind and intention, even though there is no physical contact (Mt 5:27-28; cf. Jb 31:1, 9).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s condemnation of adultery is written into the heart of the OT law, prophecy, and wisdom literature. The Ten Commandments ban it unequivocally (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18). The prophets list it among offenses that attract God’s anger and judgment (Jer 23:11-14; Ez 22:11; Mal 3:5). And the book of Proverbs scorns it as a senseless act by which a man destroys himself (Prv 6:23-35; cf. 7:6-27).<\/p>\n<p>The NT echoes that clear condemnation. Where there is no repentance, adultery excludes those who practice it from God’s kingdom (1 Cor 6:9). It is the very opposite of love of one’s neighbor (Rom 13:9-10), and it stands under the judgment of God himself (Heb 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the penalty for adultery is death—for both the man and the woman (Lv 20:10; Dt 22:22). The same applies if the woman is single but engaged to another man, assuming she has not been raped (in which case only the man is to be executed—Dt 22:23-27). The refrain “You will cleanse the land from evil” (22:24) shows that adultery was considered a serious threat to society’s health, not simply an attack on the family lives of the two people involved.<\/p>\n<p>With such serious consequences, it was important to establish guilt beyond doubt. In cases of serious suspicion but insufficient evidence, the wife concerned was put through an elaborate ritual test that included taking an oath and drinking bitter water. The result was not a matter of chance because she stood in the Lord’s presence (Nm 5:11-31).<\/p>\n<p>In both the OT and NT, the language of adultery is used figuratively to describe human unfaithfulness to God. The OT prophets likened God’s covenant relationship with his people to marriage (Is 54:5-8; cf. Rv 21:2), so in their eyes the breaking of that relationship, especially by idolatry, was equivalent to spiritual adultery (Jer 5:7-8; 13:22-27; Ez 23:37).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the same imagery to characterize those who either rejected his claims or showed their lack of faith in him by demanding unnecessary extra signs of his deity (Mt 12:39; 16:4; Mk 8:38). And in another vivid NT passage, James describes God as a loving, jealous husband coming to deal with his adulterous people who have become good friends with the world and its false standards (Jas 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>This is the special theme of the prophet Hosea. God used the prophet’s own experience of a marriage broken by adultery to teach the seriousness of his people’s unfaithfulness to him (Hos 2:2-6) and his keen longing for a full reconciliation (3:1-5). Spiritual infidelity, like physical adultery, brings God’s judgment. But in both cases his overwhelming desire is for a mended relationship following sincere repentance (Jer 3:1-14; Ez 16:1-63).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Divorce; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Fornication.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ADULTERY<\/h3>\n<p>A breach of the unity of marriage. It describes any act of sexual intercourse between a married woman and a man other than her husband, and all sexual intercourse involving a married man and a woman other than his wife.<\/p>\n<p>In OT times, polygamous unions were not considered adulterous (cf. Dt 21:15). Nor was a husband branded as an adulterer if he had intercourse with a slave woman (Gn 16:1-4; 30:1-5) or a prostitute (Gn 38:15-18)—though the latter was, of course, condemned as immoral (1 Cor 6:15).<\/p>\n<p>Any imbalance between the sexes was dispelled by Jesus in his teaching on divorce and remarriage. While he did not rule out the possibility of divorce in cases of sexual unfaithfulness (Mt 5:32; 19:9), he warned that in all other circumstances remarriage involves both (ex-)husband and (ex-)wife in adultery. Paul added that the charge of adultery only applies if the remarried person’s original partner is still alive (Rom 7:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also sharpened the OT’s definition of adultery by applying it to a man’s thought life. Any man who fantasizes in lust (as distinct from just being tempted) has committed adultery in mind and intention, even though there is no physical contact (Mt 5:27-28; cf. Jb 31:1, 9).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s condemnation of adultery is written into the heart of the OT law, prophecy, and wisdom literature. The Ten Commandments ban it unequivocally (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18). The prophets list it among offenses that attract God’s anger and judgment (Jer 23:11-14; Ez 22:11; Mal 3:5). And the book of Proverbs scorns it as a senseless act by which a man destroys himself (Prv 6:23-35; cf. 7:6-27).<\/p>\n<p>The NT echoes that clear condemnation. Where there is no repentance, adultery excludes those who practice it from God’s kingdom (1 Cor 6:9). It is the very opposite of love of one’s neighbor (Rom 13:9-10), and it stands under the judgment of God himself (Heb 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the penalty for adultery is death—for both the man and the woman (Lv 20:10; Dt 22:22). The same applies if the woman is single but engaged to another man, assuming she has not been raped (in which case only the man is to be executed—Dt 22:23-27). The refrain “You will cleanse the land from evil” (22:24) shows that adultery was considered a serious threat to society’s health, not simply an attack on the family lives of the two people involved.<\/p>\n<p>With such serious consequences, it was important to establish guilt beyond doubt. In cases of serious suspicion but insufficient evidence, the wife concerned was put through an elaborate ritual test that included taking an oath and drinking bitter water. The result was not a matter of chance because she stood in the Lord’s presence (Nm 5:11-31).<\/p>\n<p>In both the OT and NT, the language of adultery is used figuratively to describe human unfaithfulness to God. The OT prophets likened God’s covenant relationship with his people to marriage (Is 54:5-8; cf. Rv 21:2), so in their eyes the breaking of that relationship, especially by idolatry, was equivalent to spiritual adultery (Jer 5:7-8; 13:22-27; Ez 23:37).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the same imagery to characterize those who either rejected his claims or showed their lack of faith in him by demanding unnecessary extra signs of his deity (Mt 12:39; 16:4; Mk 8:38). And in another vivid NT passage, James describes God as a loving, jealous husband coming to deal with his adulterous people who have become good friends with the world and its false standards (Jas 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>This is the special theme of the prophet Hosea. God used the prophet’s own experience of a marriage broken by adultery to teach the seriousness of his people’s unfaithfulness to him (Hos 2:2-6) and his keen longing for a full reconciliation (3:1-5). Spiritual infidelity, like physical adultery, brings God’s judgment. But in both cases his overwhelming desire is for a mended relationship following sincere repentance (Jer 3:1-14; Ez 16:1-63).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Divorce; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Fornication.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ADULTERY A breach of the unity of marriage. It describes any act of sexual intercourse between a married woman and a man other than her husband, and all sexual intercourse involving a married man and a woman other than his wife. In OT times, polygamous unions were not considered adulterous (cf. Dt 21:15). Nor was a husband branded as an adulterer if he had intercourse with a slave woman (Gn 16:1-4; 30:1-5) or a prostitute (Gn 38:15-18)—though the latter was, of course, condemned as immoral (1...","summary_en":"ADULTERY A breach of the unity of marriage. It describes any act of sexual intercourse between a married woman and a man other than her husband, and all sexual intercourse involving a married man and a woman other than his wife. In OT times, polygamous unions were not considered adulterous (cf. Dt 21:15). Nor was a husband branded as an adulterer if he had intercourse with a slave woman (Gn 16:1-4; 30:1-5) or a prostitute (Gn 38:15-18)—though the latter was, of course, condemned as immoral (1...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7294,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandments, the Ten","title_en":"Commandments, the Ten","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34531,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sex, Sexuality*","title_en":"Sex, Sexuality*","content_ro":"<h3>SEX, SEXUALITY*<\/h3>\n<p>Unlike some religious and philosophical systems, the Bible takes a positive view of human sexuality. According to the OT’s account of Creation, it was God himself who made people sexual beings. Being male or female is part of what it means to be created in the image of God (Gn 1:26-28). Above everything else, therefore, sexuality is a precious aspect of what a person <em>is,<\/em> not merely a description of what he or she <em>does.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>In line with this positive approach, the OT sees nothing embarrassing in the bodily differences between the sexes (Gn 2:25) and nothing shameful in physical expressions of lovemaking (Prv 5:18-19; Eccl 9:9). The Song of Songs, in particular, is a most beautiful love poem. Its powerful language should not be so spiritualized that the physical passion it describes is stripped of its delight and candor.<\/p>\n<p>Paul strikes the same positive note in his letters to Corinth and to Timothy at Ephesus. Sexual vice was rampant in both these cities. Partly as a reaction to this, a negative, ascetic attitude was threatening to take control in the life of Christians. Marriage was being forbidden (1 Tm 4:3) and married couples were abstaining from sexual intercourse in the belief that this would help them to become more spiritually mature (cf. 1 Cor 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul had no hesitation in branding such attitudes as heretical. Recalling his readers to the message of Genesis, he encouraged them to receive God’s gifts thankfully (1 Tm 4:3-5). Husbands and wives, he writes, are mutually obliged to satisfy each other’s sexual needs (1 Cor 7:3-4).<\/p>\n<p>Most obviously, God made sex for procreation (Gn 1:28). But sex is for relationship as well as procreation. Genesis 2 describes how God made woman to fill man’s relationship vacuum (2:18-24). The relational purpose of human sexuality embraces far more than physical intercourse. In this broad sense, being male or being female is a God-given aid to making all sorts of relationships, including some not normally thought of as sexual at all.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible does not, of course, ignore the darker side of human nature. Having described the goodness of sex in the Creator’s perfect plan, Genesis goes on to explain how man’s disobedience to God spoiled sex, just as it spoiled every other aspect of human life.<\/p>\n<p>Nudity became a matter of embarrassment and fear, as men and women eyed each other as sex objects instead of as people with physical differences (Gn 3:7-10). On the relational side, trust and tenderness gave way to betrayal and harshness. Here lies the root cause of all the discrimination and abuse that fuel modern feminist protests. And procreation was spoiled, too, as the marvelous experience of childbirth was marred by unnecessary pain and distress.<\/p>\n<p>This is the context in which the Bible’s ban on extramarital intercourse should be read; it prohibits adultery (Ex 20:14) and any kind of extramarital or premarital sex (1 Cor 6:18; 1 Thes 4:3). The Bible does not usually pause to back up its prohibitions with arguments, but on the rare occasions when it does expand its veto on extramarital intercourse, the reasons given are highly instructive. There is no appeal to consequences (these things are wrong because they result in disease and unwanted babies) or even to motives (these things are wrong if they are done in an unloving spirit). All extramarital sex is wrong <em>in itself,<\/em> simply because the body is not meant for sexual immorality and those who commit sexual sins sin against their own bodies (1 Cor 6:13, 18). Sexual intercourse is a unique kind of body language that the Creator has designed to express and seal that special, exclusive, life-long relationship between a man and a woman which the Bible labels “marriage.”<\/p>\n<p>The Bible also prohibits homosexuality (Lv 18:22; Rom 1:26-27; 1 Cor 6:9-10; 1 Tm 1:9-10). The only verses that provide an explanation for this prohibition are Romans 1:24-27. Essentially, these verses indicate that God gave up on those who gave up on him when they turned from worshiping the Creator to worshiping things God made—that is, when they became idolaters. As such, God abandoned them, as they abandoned themselves to their own sinful and sexual desires, especially practicing homosexuality. Thus, homosexuality is seen as a violation of the natural created order and thereby an offense to God the Creator who created men and women, male and female, for procreation.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s advice to anyone caught up in sexual temptation is practical: flee from temptation. When Joseph was invited by another man’s wife to go to bed with her, he left his cloak in her hand and ran out of the house (Gn 39:12). And Paul tells his Christian readers to follow Joseph’s good example (1 Cor 6:18; 2 Tm 2:22). This is an acknowledgment of the power of the normal person’s sex drive, not a counsel of despair. The power of the Holy Spirit, Paul taught, gives any believer the strength to win the war against sexual temptation. He knew Christians who had found the Spirit’s power to gain self-control and conquer the most deeply ingrained habits (1 Cor 6:9-11; Gal 5:22-23; 2 Tm 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, there is a strong hint in the NT that God is going to end human sexuality just as he began it. There will be no marriage, Jesus taught, in heaven (Mt 22:30). That is an unlikely but fitting climax to the Bible’s teaching on sex and sexuality. When there is no more death, the need to procreate will be over. And when relationships are perfectly loving, there will no longer be any need for a sexual prop to support them. So both of God’s main purposes for human sexuality will be perfectly fulfilled in eternity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Divorce; Family Life and Relations; Man; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Virgin; Woman.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SEX, SEXUALITY*<\/h3>\n<p>Unlike some religious and philosophical systems, the Bible takes a positive view of human sexuality. According to the OT’s account of Creation, it was God himself who made people sexual beings. Being male or female is part of what it means to be created in the image of God (Gn 1:26-28). Above everything else, therefore, sexuality is a precious aspect of what a person <em>is,<\/em> not merely a description of what he or she <em>does.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>In line with this positive approach, the OT sees nothing embarrassing in the bodily differences between the sexes (Gn 2:25) and nothing shameful in physical expressions of lovemaking (Prv 5:18-19; Eccl 9:9). The Song of Songs, in particular, is a most beautiful love poem. Its powerful language should not be so spiritualized that the physical passion it describes is stripped of its delight and candor.<\/p>\n<p>Paul strikes the same positive note in his letters to Corinth and to Timothy at Ephesus. Sexual vice was rampant in both these cities. Partly as a reaction to this, a negative, ascetic attitude was threatening to take control in the life of Christians. Marriage was being forbidden (1 Tm 4:3) and married couples were abstaining from sexual intercourse in the belief that this would help them to become more spiritually mature (cf. 1 Cor 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul had no hesitation in branding such attitudes as heretical. Recalling his readers to the message of Genesis, he encouraged them to receive God’s gifts thankfully (1 Tm 4:3-5). Husbands and wives, he writes, are mutually obliged to satisfy each other’s sexual needs (1 Cor 7:3-4).<\/p>\n<p>Most obviously, God made sex for procreation (Gn 1:28). But sex is for relationship as well as procreation. Genesis 2 describes how God made woman to fill man’s relationship vacuum (2:18-24). The relational purpose of human sexuality embraces far more than physical intercourse. In this broad sense, being male or being female is a God-given aid to making all sorts of relationships, including some not normally thought of as sexual at all.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible does not, of course, ignore the darker side of human nature. Having described the goodness of sex in the Creator’s perfect plan, Genesis goes on to explain how man’s disobedience to God spoiled sex, just as it spoiled every other aspect of human life.<\/p>\n<p>Nudity became a matter of embarrassment and fear, as men and women eyed each other as sex objects instead of as people with physical differences (Gn 3:7-10). On the relational side, trust and tenderness gave way to betrayal and harshness. Here lies the root cause of all the discrimination and abuse that fuel modern feminist protests. And procreation was spoiled, too, as the marvelous experience of childbirth was marred by unnecessary pain and distress.<\/p>\n<p>This is the context in which the Bible’s ban on extramarital intercourse should be read; it prohibits adultery (Ex 20:14) and any kind of extramarital or premarital sex (1 Cor 6:18; 1 Thes 4:3). The Bible does not usually pause to back up its prohibitions with arguments, but on the rare occasions when it does expand its veto on extramarital intercourse, the reasons given are highly instructive. There is no appeal to consequences (these things are wrong because they result in disease and unwanted babies) or even to motives (these things are wrong if they are done in an unloving spirit). All extramarital sex is wrong <em>in itself,<\/em> simply because the body is not meant for sexual immorality and those who commit sexual sins sin against their own bodies (1 Cor 6:13, 18). Sexual intercourse is a unique kind of body language that the Creator has designed to express and seal that special, exclusive, life-long relationship between a man and a woman which the Bible labels “marriage.”<\/p>\n<p>The Bible also prohibits homosexuality (Lv 18:22; Rom 1:26-27; 1 Cor 6:9-10; 1 Tm 1:9-10). The only verses that provide an explanation for this prohibition are Romans 1:24-27. Essentially, these verses indicate that God gave up on those who gave up on him when they turned from worshiping the Creator to worshiping things God made—that is, when they became idolaters. As such, God abandoned them, as they abandoned themselves to their own sinful and sexual desires, especially practicing homosexuality. Thus, homosexuality is seen as a violation of the natural created order and thereby an offense to God the Creator who created men and women, male and female, for procreation.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s advice to anyone caught up in sexual temptation is practical: flee from temptation. When Joseph was invited by another man’s wife to go to bed with her, he left his cloak in her hand and ran out of the house (Gn 39:12). And Paul tells his Christian readers to follow Joseph’s good example (1 Cor 6:18; 2 Tm 2:22). This is an acknowledgment of the power of the normal person’s sex drive, not a counsel of despair. The power of the Holy Spirit, Paul taught, gives any believer the strength to win the war against sexual temptation. He knew Christians who had found the Spirit’s power to gain self-control and conquer the most deeply ingrained habits (1 Cor 6:9-11; Gal 5:22-23; 2 Tm 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, there is a strong hint in the NT that God is going to end human sexuality just as he began it. There will be no marriage, Jesus taught, in heaven (Mt 22:30). That is an unlikely but fitting climax to the Bible’s teaching on sex and sexuality. When there is no more death, the need to procreate will be over. And when relationships are perfectly loving, there will no longer be any need for a sexual prop to support them. So both of God’s main purposes for human sexuality will be perfectly fulfilled in eternity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Divorce; Family Life and Relations; Man; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Virgin; Woman.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SEX, SEXUALITY* Unlike some religious and philosophical systems, the Bible takes a positive view of human sexuality. According to the OT’s account of Creation, it was God himself who made people sexual beings. Being male or female is part of what it means to be created in the image of God (Gn 1:26-28). Above everything else, therefore, sexuality is a precious aspect of what a person is, not merely a description of what he or she does. In line with this positive approach, the OT sees nothing e...","summary_en":"SEX, SEXUALITY* Unlike some religious and philosophical systems, the Bible takes a positive view of human sexuality. According to the OT’s account of Creation, it was God himself who made people sexual beings. Being male or female is part of what it means to be created in the image of God (Gn 1:26-28). Above everything else, therefore, sexuality is a precious aspect of what a person is, not merely a description of what he or she does. In line with this positive approach, the OT sees nothing e...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43848,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:14","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:14<\/strong> <em>adultery:<\/em> Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:14<\/strong> <em>adultery:<\/em> Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:14 adultery: Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.","summary_en":"20:14 adultery: Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71474,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:14","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:14<\/strong> <em>adultery:<\/em> Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:14<\/strong> <em>adultery:<\/em> Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:14 adultery: Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.","summary_en":"20:14 adultery: Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99100,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:14","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:14<\/strong> <em>adultery:<\/em> Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:14<\/strong> <em>adultery:<\/em> Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:14 adultery: Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.","summary_en":"20:14 adultery: Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126726,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:14","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:14<\/strong> <em>adultery:<\/em> Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:14<\/strong> <em>adultery:<\/em> Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:14 adultery: Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.","summary_en":"20:14 adultery: Here this term represents all sexual sins, among which adultery most clearly indicates breaking faith. Adulterers satisfy their sexual desires as they please, and they break faith with their spouse in so doing. Jesus expanded on this command in Matt 5:27-30.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":7297,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandments, the Ten","title_en":"Commandments, the Ten","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43849,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:15","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:15<\/strong> Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:15<\/strong> Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:15 Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.","summary_en":"20:15 Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71475,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:15","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:15<\/strong> Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:15<\/strong> Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:15 Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.","summary_en":"20:15 Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99101,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:15","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:15<\/strong> Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:15<\/strong> Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:15 Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.","summary_en":"20:15 Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126727,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:15","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:15<\/strong> Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:15<\/strong> Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:15 Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.","summary_en":"20:15 Stealing is another way of saying that I have an absolute right to my own way, whether I have earned it or not. From the divine side, the prohibition says that God values us even down to our possessions.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":7300,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandments, the Ten","title_en":"Commandments, the Ten","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27263,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Neighbor","title_en":"Neighbor","content_ro":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","summary_en":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38509,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Witness","title_en":"Witness","content_ro":"<h3>WITNESS<\/h3>\n<p>One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheOldTestament\">Witness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1).<\/p>\n<p>The truth of testimony is so important that the Bible expressly forbids false witness in the ninth commandment (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20; cf. Mk 10:19; Lk 18:20). The practical wisdom of Proverbs speaks out frequently against the false witness (e.g., Prv 6:19; 14:5; 25:18). Nevertheless, false witnesses did arise (Pss 27:12; 35:11), and there are notable examples of the bringing of more than one witness in order to bring about the death of an innocent person. The case of Naboth and his vineyard is notorious; here Jezebel, wife of King Ahab, bribed two men to bear false witness against Naboth so that he would be stoned to death and her wicked husband could take the vineyard he coveted so intensely (1 Kgs 21).<\/p>\n<p>Witnesses could be tested by the judges. If the testimony of an accuser was found to be false, that person was subjected to the punishment he had sought to have executed on the defendant (Dt 19:16-21). Proverbs also speaks of the punishment of the false witness (Prv 19:5, 9; 21:28).<\/p>\n<p>The OT records several accounts of legal proceedings in which witnesses are mentioned. Most of these involve the purchase or transfer of property. Ruth 4:7-12 relates the redemption of a field from Naomi by Boaz. Isaiah found “reliable witnesses” concerning a property title written on a large tablet (Is 8:1-2). To confirm the prophecy of the return of the exiles from Babylon, Jeremiah bought and paid for a field in the presence of witnesses, who also signed the deed for the property (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>At the conclusion of his farewell message at Shechem, Joshua declared that the Israelites themselves were witnesses that they had chosen to serve the Lord; then he set up a large stone and declared that it also was a witness (Jos 24:22-27). The people of Israel themselves were declared God’s witnesses (Is 43:10; 44:8-9). They were witnesses to the existence of God, to his uniqueness, holiness, power, and love. When they failed to acknowledge his uniqueness and holiness and turned to idolatry, he sent them into captivity, as he had warned, for they had failed in their witness and had given opportunity for the enemies of God to blaspheme.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheNewTestament\">Witness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the various words for witness are mainly related to the verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">martureo<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to bear witness, be a witness.” The word “martyr” shows the ultimate form of witness in that Christians have sacrificed their lives because of their witness for Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>John the Baptist was both a witness and a martyr. As the forerunner of the Messiah, his mission was to bear witness to the light and to identify the Lamb of God (Jn 1:7-8, 19-36). The followers of Jesus, and particularly the 12 apostles, were witnesses to the person and character of Jesus. They knew him intimately, heard his teachings and observed his miracles; three were witnesses of his transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2; 2 Pt 1:17-18) and many were witnesses to his resurrection (Lk 24:48; 1 Cor 15:4-8). At the time of his ascension, the disciples were specifically commissioned to be his witnesses (Acts 1:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WITNESS<\/h3>\n<p>One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheOldTestament\">Witness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1).<\/p>\n<p>The truth of testimony is so important that the Bible expressly forbids false witness in the ninth commandment (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20; cf. Mk 10:19; Lk 18:20). The practical wisdom of Proverbs speaks out frequently against the false witness (e.g., Prv 6:19; 14:5; 25:18). Nevertheless, false witnesses did arise (Pss 27:12; 35:11), and there are notable examples of the bringing of more than one witness in order to bring about the death of an innocent person. The case of Naboth and his vineyard is notorious; here Jezebel, wife of King Ahab, bribed two men to bear false witness against Naboth so that he would be stoned to death and her wicked husband could take the vineyard he coveted so intensely (1 Kgs 21).<\/p>\n<p>Witnesses could be tested by the judges. If the testimony of an accuser was found to be false, that person was subjected to the punishment he had sought to have executed on the defendant (Dt 19:16-21). Proverbs also speaks of the punishment of the false witness (Prv 19:5, 9; 21:28).<\/p>\n<p>The OT records several accounts of legal proceedings in which witnesses are mentioned. Most of these involve the purchase or transfer of property. Ruth 4:7-12 relates the redemption of a field from Naomi by Boaz. Isaiah found “reliable witnesses” concerning a property title written on a large tablet (Is 8:1-2). To confirm the prophecy of the return of the exiles from Babylon, Jeremiah bought and paid for a field in the presence of witnesses, who also signed the deed for the property (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>At the conclusion of his farewell message at Shechem, Joshua declared that the Israelites themselves were witnesses that they had chosen to serve the Lord; then he set up a large stone and declared that it also was a witness (Jos 24:22-27). The people of Israel themselves were declared God’s witnesses (Is 43:10; 44:8-9). They were witnesses to the existence of God, to his uniqueness, holiness, power, and love. When they failed to acknowledge his uniqueness and holiness and turned to idolatry, he sent them into captivity, as he had warned, for they had failed in their witness and had given opportunity for the enemies of God to blaspheme.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheNewTestament\">Witness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the various words for witness are mainly related to the verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">martureo<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to bear witness, be a witness.” The word “martyr” shows the ultimate form of witness in that Christians have sacrificed their lives because of their witness for Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>John the Baptist was both a witness and a martyr. As the forerunner of the Messiah, his mission was to bear witness to the light and to identify the Lamb of God (Jn 1:7-8, 19-36). The followers of Jesus, and particularly the 12 apostles, were witnesses to the person and character of Jesus. They knew him intimately, heard his teachings and observed his miracles; three were witnesses of his transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2; 2 Pt 1:17-18) and many were witnesses to his resurrection (Lk 24:48; 1 Cor 15:4-8). At the time of his ascension, the disciples were specifically commissioned to be his witnesses (Acts 1:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"WITNESS One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given. Witness in the Old Testament In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1). The truth of testimony is so i...","summary_en":"WITNESS One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given. Witness in the Old Testament In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1). The truth of testimony is so i...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43850,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:16","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to <em>testify falsely against your neighbor<\/em> is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to <em>testify falsely against your neighbor<\/em> is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:16 Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to testify falsely against your neighbor is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.","summary_en":"20:16 Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to testify falsely against your neighbor is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71476,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:16","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to <em>testify falsely against your neighbor<\/em> is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to <em>testify falsely against your neighbor<\/em> is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:16 Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to testify falsely against your neighbor is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.","summary_en":"20:16 Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to testify falsely against your neighbor is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99102,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:16","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to <em>testify falsely against your neighbor<\/em> is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to <em>testify falsely against your neighbor<\/em> is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:16 Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to testify falsely against your neighbor is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.","summary_en":"20:16 Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to testify falsely against your neighbor is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126728,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:16","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to <em>testify falsely against your neighbor<\/em> is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to <em>testify falsely against your neighbor<\/em> is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:16 Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to testify falsely against your neighbor is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.","summary_en":"20:16 Not telling a lie can be a very individual act, and even a prideful one. But refusing to testify falsely against your neighbor is an unselfish act, in which your neighbor’s reputation and well-being is more important to you than your own.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":1800,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Animals","title_en":"Animals","content_ro":"<h3>ANIMALS<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals as object lessons.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical approach to classification of animals is somewhat different from the system of classification used by biologists today. The present system of classification, which traces back to Carolus Linnaeus (an 18th-century Swedish botanist), is based on structure, both internal and external. The biblical basis of classification is habitat. Thus Genesis 1 speaks of aquatic organisms (v 20); aerial organisms (v 21); animals that crawl on the ground (v 24); cattle or domesticated animals (animals that live in association with humans) (v 24); and wild animals (v 24). The same system of classification is followed in Leviticus 11 and throughout Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Because of the divergence between systems of classification, the various animals of the Bible will be listed here in alphabetical order—including reptiles, fish, and even invertebrates such as insects, spiders, worms, and sponges. Birds are discussed in a separate article.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Adder<\/p>\n<p>• Ant<\/p>\n<p>• Antelope<\/p>\n<p>• Ape<\/p>\n<p>• Asp<\/p>\n<p>• Ass<\/p>\n<p>• Badger<\/p>\n<p>• Bat<\/p>\n<p>• Bear<\/p>\n<p>• Bee<\/p>\n<p>• Behemoth<\/p>\n<p>• Camel<\/p>\n<p>• Caterpillar<\/p>\n<p>• Cattle<\/p>\n<p>• Chameleon<\/p>\n<p>• Coral<\/p>\n<p>• Cricket<\/p>\n<p>• Crocodile<\/p>\n<p>• Deer<\/p>\n<p>• Dog<\/p>\n<p>• Donkey<\/p>\n<p>• Dragon<\/p>\n<p>• Fish<\/p>\n<p>• Flea<\/p>\n<p>• Fly<\/p>\n<p>• Fox<\/p>\n<p>• Frog<\/p>\n<p>• Gazelle<\/p>\n<p>• Gecko<\/p>\n<p>• Gnat<\/p>\n<p>• Goat<\/p>\n<p>• Grasshopper<\/p>\n<p>• Hare<\/p>\n<p>• Hippopotamus<\/p>\n<p>• Horse<\/p>\n<p>• Hyena<\/p>\n<p>• Jackal<\/p>\n<p>• Leech<\/p>\n<p>• Leopard<\/p>\n<p>• Leviathan<\/p>\n<p>• Lion<\/p>\n<p>• Lizard<\/p>\n<p>• Locust<\/p>\n<p>• Mole<\/p>\n<p>• Moth<\/p>\n<p>• Mouse<\/p>\n<p>• Mule<\/p>\n<p>• Pig<\/p>\n<p>• Porcupine<\/p>\n<p>• Scorpion<\/p>\n<p>• Sheep<\/p>\n<p>• Snail<\/p>\n<p>• Snake<\/p>\n<p>• Spider<\/p>\n<p>• Sponge<\/p>\n<p>• Unicorn<\/p>\n<p>• Wasp<\/p>\n<p>• Whale<\/p>\n<p>• Wild Ox<\/p>\n<p>• Wolf<\/p>\n<p>• Worm<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Adder\">Adder<\/p>\n<p>One of the 20 poisonous snakes found in Israel and surrounding countries, also referred to as cockatrice and viper. True vipers (genus <em>Cerastes, Echis colorata,<\/em> and <em>Vipera palestina<\/em>) also exist there, poisonous snakes with curved fangs that spring into position when the snake strikes. The horned viper <em>(Cerastes hasselquistii)<\/em> may attack horses. It is 12 to 18 inches (30 to 46 centimeters) long and often lies in ambush in the sand with only its eyes and the hornlike protrusions on its head visible.<\/p>\n<p>Both Jesus and John the Baptist referred to the viper several times (Mt 3:7; 12:34; 23:33). The reference in Acts 28:3 is probably to a small viper <em>(Vipera aspis)<\/em> that strikes rapidly and is very pugnacious. It is found in southern Europe and hisses each time it inhales and exhales. The poison of vipers attacks the respiratory system and disintegrates red blood cells.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ant\">Ant<\/p>\n<p>Mentioned only twice in the Bible, both times in the book of Proverbs. For many years Solomon was charged with a biological error when he referred to the ant as providing her meat in the summer and gathering her food in the harvest (Prv 6:8). Critics of the Bible were quick to point out that, so far as was then known, ants do not store up food. They assumed that Solomon had probably kicked open an ant hill and mistaken the pupal cases (pods in which immature ants grow to maturity) for grain or had observed ants carrying bits of grain, leaves, and other matter to their nests.<\/p>\n<p>At least three species of grain-storing ants are now known—two occur in Israel and the other in Mediterranean countries. The particular species referred to by Solomon (Prv 6:6-8; 30:24-25) is probably the harvester ant <em>(Messor semirufus).<\/em> Its granaries are flat chambers connected by galleries irregularly scattered over an area about six feet (1.8 meters) in diameter and about a foot (.3 meter) deep in the ground. Seeds are collected from the ground or picked from plants. The head, or radicle, which is the softest part of the kernel, is bitten off to prevent germination, and the chaff and empty capsules are discarded on kitchen middens (refuse piles) outside the nest. Individual granaries may be 5 inches (12.7 centimeters) in diameter and a half inch (1.2 centimeters) high. Some nests are known to be 40 feet (12 meters) in diameter and 6 to 7 feet (approx. 2 meters) deep with several entrances.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Antelope\">Antelope<\/p>\n<p>Several antelope-like creatures are referred to in the Scriptures. One seems to be the white oryx <em>(Oryx leucoryx),<\/em> referred to in Deuteronomy 14:5 (<span>kjv<\/span> “wild ox”; <span>rsv<\/span> “antelope”) and Isaiah 51:20 (<span>kjv<\/span> “wild bull”; <span>RSV <\/span>“antelope”). The oryx was probably the antelope, commonly used for food because its long horns made it relatively easy to catch.<\/p>\n<p>Another antelope mentioned in the Bible is the addax <em>(Addax nasomaculatus),<\/em> probably the “pygarg” of Deuteronomy 14:5 (<span>kjv<\/span>). It is a native of North Africa with grayish white hinder parts, a white patch on the forehead, and twisted and ringed horns. The word “pygarg” comes from a Greek word meaning “white rump.” The addax is about the size of a donkey. Its body is closely covered with short hair. It has a short mane on the underside of its neck that makes the head look somewhat like that of a goat. The hooves are broad and flat, and the tail resembles that of a donkey. It is common in Africa and in Arabia, where Arabs hunt it with falcons and dogs.<\/p>\n<p>Antelopes are very graceful and run with their heads held high. Both sexes have long, permanent, hollow horns. With the oryx the horns go straight back; addax horns are twisted and ringed. Antelope are alert, wary, and keen sighted. They are usually found in herds of from two to a dozen. If injured or brought to bay, an antelope attacks with its head lowered so that the sharp horns point forward. Antelopes feed on grasses and shrubs, drinking from streams and water holes. When water is scarce, they eat melons and succulent bulbs. Both addax and oryx were ceremonially clean in Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ape\">Ape<\/p>\n<p>Primate not native to Palestine. The two references to apes in the OT (1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21) refer to their importation by King Solomon with other treasures on board the ships of his mercantile fleet. There is some question concerning the origin of those primates. Some believe that the mention of “ivory” in the same verses suggests they came from East Africa and that they were indeed apes, that is, tailless primates. Others, believing they came from India or Ceylon, suggest that they were actually monkeys. There the baboon (genus Papeio), a large monkey, was considered sacred to the god Thoth. Males of that genus were kept in temples, and the more docile females were often kept as house pets. Such baboons frequently had some of their teeth removed or ground down to lessen the danger of their biting. A number of mummified baboons have been found in Egypt, indicating the high regard in which they were held.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Asp\">Asp<\/p>\n<p>Poisonous snake. Most biblical references to the asp (Dt 32:33) seem to be to the Egyptian cobra <em>(Naja haje),<\/em> which conceals itself in holes, walls, and rocks and has the ability to expand its neck by raising its anterior ribs so as to enlarge the front of its breast into the shape of a flat disc. Its potent poison can cause death in 30 minutes. It attains a length of about 80 inches (2 meters). The fangs are permanently erect, not movable as in the vipers (the common poisonous snakes of North America; only the coral snake in America has permanently erect fangs). Cobra poison attacks the nervous system, causing muscular paralysis. The Egyptians looked upon it as a sacred creature; they regarded it as a protector since it fed on the rodents that ate their crops. The “fiery serpents” (Nm 21:6; Dt 8:15, both <span>rsv<\/span>) may have been cobras; “fiery” probably refers to the burning fever caused by their venom. Isaiah 14:29 and 30:6 (“flying serpent”) may refer to the hood of the cobra.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ass\">Ass<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Donkey (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Badger\">Badger<\/p>\n<p>Small hoofed mammal. What the <span>kjv<\/span> calls a “coney,” modern translations name “rock badger” (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7; Ps 104:18; Prv 30:26). The rock badger spoken of in the Bible is probably the Syrian rock hyrax <em>(Hyrax syriaca),<\/em> the only species of hyrax found outside Africa. This small ungulate (having hooflike toenails) lives among rocks from the Dead Sea valley to Mt Hermon. It is strictly a herbivorous (plant-eating) animal about the size of a rabbit. It resembles a guinea pig more than a rabbit, having quite inconspicuous ears and a very small tail. It has broad nails with four toes on its forelegs and three on its hind legs, the toes being connected with skin almost like a web. Pads acting as sucking discs under its feet enable it to keep its footing on slippery rocks. With its yellow and brown fur, it is sometimes called the bear rat because of its resemblance to a tailless rat. It is also equipped with black whiskers that may be seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p>These rock badgers, or hyraxes, live together in colonies of from 6 to 50 animals, often sunning themselves on rocks. They are difficult to catch. Guards are posted, and if approaching danger is sighted, the whole group will scurry for cover, warned by the sharp whistles of the guards. Thus they are commended for taking refuge in the rocks (Ps 104:18) and are called wise for making “their houses in the rocks” (Prv 30:24, 26, <span>kjv<\/span>). The badger is not a ruminant (does not chew its cud), but the motion of its jaws may suggest that it chews its cud. That is probably why it was included with other cud-chewing animals in the Jewish food laws (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7). It was forbidden to the Jews as food because it did not have cloven hooves. Some Arabs eat and even prize its meat.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bat\">Bat<\/p>\n<p>Flying mammals according to modern classification. They have hair and provide milk for their young. The Bible classifies them with other aerial creatures. Bats take shelter in caves, crevices, tree cavities, buildings, and also in exposed places on trees. In colder areas they hibernate or migrate. The normal resting position for a bat is hanging head downward. Bats “swim” through the air rather than fly because they move with their legs as well as with their wings.<\/p>\n<p>The bat’s thumb is free and terminates in a single hook claw used for climbing and hanging. The hind feet have five toes, all pointing the same way. The large chest accommodates the powerful muscles needed for flying. Because they orient themselves by echo location, the sense of hearing is very well developed.<\/p>\n<p>Most bats are insect eaters, seizing insects in flight. Many insectivorous bats also eat some fruit. Other bats feed exclusively, usually in groups, on fruit and green vegetation. Fruit-eating bats generally live in the tropics where fruit is constantly ripening, although some have been found in the Holy Land. These bats tend to be larger than the insectivores, having a wingspread of up to five feet (1.5 meters).<\/p>\n<p>A third group includes flower-eating bats that feed on pollen and nectar. These small bats with long pointed heads and long tongues are found only in tropical and semitropical regions. Three species of vampire bats, which do not occur in the Holy Land, eat blood by making a small incision and lapping it up. Carnivorous (meat-eating) bats prey on birds, lizards, and frogs. Fish-eating bats catch fish at or near the water surface.<\/p>\n<p>Eight varieties of bats are known in the Holy Land. One of them, the little brown bat (genus <em>Myotis<\/em>), is worldwide in its distribution. It is insectivorous and probably has the widest distribution of any nonhuman terrestrial mammal. Brown bats are mostly cave dwellers. The females form maternity colonies that may number in the tens of thousands.<\/p>\n<p>Two species of mouse-tailed bats (genus <em>Rhinopoma<\/em>) are found in the Holy Land. Their tails are nearly as long as the head and body combined. They are colonial, roosting in caves, rock clefts, wells, pyramids, palaces, and houses. Like the brown bat, they are insectivorous. The slit-faced or hollow-faced bats (genus <em>Nycteris<\/em>) are also found in the Holy Land. They are insectivorous and roost in groups from 6 to 20.<\/p>\n<p>The bats found in the Holy Land vary in size from that of a mouse to the size of a rat; the largest species measures more than 20 inches (51 centimeters) across the wings. The bat was unclean to the Jews (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bear\">Bear<\/p>\n<p>Large, heavy, big-headed mammal with short, powerful limbs, a short tail, and small eyes and ears. Bears have a “plantigrade” walk: they walk on both the sole and heel as humans do. The Palestinian bear is a Syrian version of the brown bear <em>(Ursus arctos syriacus).<\/em> It can grow to a height of 6 feet (1.8 meters) and may weigh as much as 500 pounds (227 kilograms).<\/p>\n<p>Bears have an excellent sense of smell but less developed senses of sight and hearing. They are omnivorous (eating any kind of food); they subsist largely on vegetation, fruits, insects, and fish.<\/p>\n<p>Bears are usually peaceful and inoffensive, but if they think they must defend themselves (Lam 3:10) or their young (2 Sm 17:8; Prv 17:12; Hos 13:8), they may be formidable and dangerous adversaries. David boasted of his role as a bear killer (1 Sm 17:34-37). Since a blow from a bear’s paw can be fatal, David’s courage and strength as a young shepherd in running after a bear and wrenching one of his father’s sheep from its jaws were noteworthy.<\/p>\n<p>Some biblical passages seem to imply that bears attacked for no apparent reason (e.g., Prv 28:15; Am 5:19). At other times they were God’s instruments of punishment, as in the story of Elisha and the two she-bears (2 Kgs 2:24). The bear and the lion, often mentioned together in the Bible (1 Sm 17:37), were the two largest and strongest beasts of prey in the Holy Land. Thus they symbolized both strength and terror (Am 5:19).<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times bears seem to have roamed all over Palestine. Today they are found only in the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains, and even there they are rare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bee\">Bee<\/p>\n<p>One of two domesticated insects <em>(Apis mellifica),<\/em> the other being the silkworm. Bees gather nectar from flowers, transferring pollen from one flower to another in the process. It is believed that they convey the location of sources of nectar to other bees through a bee “dance,” which may indicate both distance and direction. Bees are sensitive to four colors: blue-green, yellow-green, blue-violet, and ultra-violet (invisible to humans).<\/p>\n<p>The wild bees of the Holy Land are especially noted for their ferocity in attack. Only the female “worker” bees sting people and animals, the virulence of their venom increasing in warm weather. A number of biblical passages allude to the irritable, vindictive nature of bees and to the painful stings they inflict (Dt 1:44; Ps 118:12; Is 7:18).<\/p>\n<p>One reference calls attention to the fact that in semidesert regions a dead animal’s carcass, stripped to the bone by jackals or vultures and dried in the sun, can provide wild bees an excellent place to start a new colony (Jgs 14:5-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians considered the bee sacred. In ancient Greece candles were made from beeswax. In the Holy Land, beekeeping was probably not practiced until the Hellenistic period (second century <span>BC<\/span>), although Ezekiel 27:17 suggests that it may have been practiced earlier. If domestic honey was not available to the Hebrews, wild honey certainly was, and travelers would be on the lookout for caches of honey in rocky clefts and other likely places. The Philistines and the Hittites practiced beekeeping in their cities.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible contains many references to bees and bee products. A bee swarm was a valuable asset, though the price of honey itself was low. Honey was sometimes eaten with the honeycomb (Sg 5:1). Honey also had uses other than food, e.g., in embalming.<\/p>\n<p>The land of Israel was described as a land flowing with milk and honey. Honey was a major source of sweetening in the ancient Near East—hence, its importance (cf. Jgs 14:8-9). Actually the Hebrew word for “honey” may include not only bee honey but also the sweet syrup extracted from such fruits as figs, dates, and grapes. Thus “a land flowing with milk and honey” (Ex 3:8, <span>rsv<\/span>) does not necessarily stand for a land of bees but for a land rich in sweetness.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Honey.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Behemoth\">Behemoth<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Hippopotamus (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Camel\">Camel<\/p>\n<p>Large beast of burden. Unintelligent, ill-natured, and quarrelsome, the camel <em>(Camelus dromedarius)<\/em> is nevertheless a blessing to people living in the desert and on its borders because it is especially adapted to that habitat. It has been called the ship of the desert. Having thick elastic pads of fibrous tissue on its feet, it can walk on hot desert sands. It can go without water for long periods and can subsist on vegetation growing on the saline soils. The camel’s nostrils are pinched together and can be closed at will to prevent penetration of sand during violent sandstorms.<\/p>\n<p>Camels are used for transporting both goods and people. A person riding a camel can cover from 60 to 75 miles (96.5 to 121 kilometers) in a day. A camel can carry a load weighing 600 pounds (272 kilograms) or more. Camels were used heavily in the spice trade (Gn 37:25) and traveled regularly in camel trains between Arabia, Egypt, and Assyria. They were also ridden in time of war (Jgs 6:5). A camel can even be hitched to a plow in areas where the land is cultivated.<\/p>\n<p>The hair shed by camels during the early spring is preserved and used in weaving cloth and making tents. As much as 10 pounds (4.5 kilograms) of hair can be obtained from one camel. A rough cloak of camel’s hair, as worn by John the Baptist (Mt 3:4), is still worn by Bedouins today. A camel’s hair garment was also the sign of the prophetic office (Zec 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>Two varieties of camel occur within the one-humped species, the slow burden-bearing camel referred to in Genesis 37:25 and the fast dromedary of 1 Samuel 30:17. The dromedary can stand seven feet (2.1 meters) tall and measure as much as nine feet (2.7 meters) from the muzzle to the tip of the tail. With its three-chambered stomach, which can hold from 15 to 30 quarts (14.2 to 28.4 liters) of liquid, it can go for as long as 5 days during the summer or 25 days in winter without drinking. The camel’s hump is a reserve store of fat, making it possible for the animal to subsist on very little food during a desert journey.<\/p>\n<p>Another species of camel, the Bactrian camel <em>(Camelus bactrianus),<\/em> is also resident in the Holy Land. It has two humps. It is heavier, bigger, and has longer hair than the one-humped camel and is slower than the swift dromedary. Isaiah 21:7 may refer to the Bactrian camel; both kinds of camel are referred to in Esther 8:10 (<span>kjv<\/span>). Camels ranked in importance with sheep, cattle, and asses in OT times. A third of the 66 biblical references to the camel lists it with other animals.<\/p>\n<p>Camels are ruminants (cud-chewing mammals) but do not have cloven hooves. Thus, they were included in the list of unclean beasts, forbidden by the Israelites as food (Lv 11:4; Dt 14:7). They are eaten by Arabs, however, who also drink their milk (cf. Gn 32:15).<\/p>\n<p>Abraham had camels in Egypt (Gn 12:16). At first Job had 3,000 camels (Jb 1:3) and after his recovery, 6,000 (Jb 42:12). Although wide use of camels does not seem to have begun until shortly before 1000 <span>BC<\/span> (Jgs 6:5), Sumerian texts from the Old Babylonian period list camels and indicate that they had been domesticated. Camel bones and figurines have been found at various eastern archaeological sites dating from well before 1200 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Caterpillar\">Caterpillar<\/p>\n<p>Larval stage of insects characterized by complete metamorphosis. Such insects pass through four stages: egg, larva or caterpillar, pupa, and adult. Bees, flies, moths, and butterflies all pass through a larval or caterpillar stage.<\/p>\n<p>The word “caterpillar” occurs three times in the <span>nlt<\/span> (1 Kgs 8:37; 2 Chr 6:28; Ps 78:46). In the book of Joel that same Hebrew word is translated “locust” (1:4; 2:25, <span>nlt<\/span>). The locust and grasshopper to which the Hebrew word refers have an incomplete type of metamorphosis with only three stages: egg, nymph, and adult. The nymph is a miniature adult in which the wings are not fully developed, though their outline may be present. There are several nymph stages known as instars. The reference is to one of the last instars, in which the wing structures are still folded together and enclosed in a sac but are nevertheless clearly recognizable. That form of the insect is about an inch (2.5 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cattle\">Cattle<\/p>\n<p>Domestic animals of the bovine species <em>(Bos primigenius).<\/em> The OT often emphasized the beauty of cattle. Egypt was rich in cattle, especially in the Nile River delta area (Goshen), where the Hebrews settled under Joseph.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars believe that milk rather than meat was the foremost consideration in the domestication of cattle and that in early civilizations meat supplies came chiefly from wild game. Cattle also supplied strong hides that supplanted wood in the manufacture of shields. Their dung was a source of fuel when wood was scarce (Ez 4:15). They were used as beasts of burden and for plowing. Development of wheeled transportation was associated more closely with cattle than with any other animal.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical term “cattle” often refers to all domesticated animals or livestock (Gn 1:24; 2:20; 7:23; 47:6, 16-17; Ex 9:3-7; Nm 3:41, 45). Occasionally, the term was used to refer to all large domestic animals (Nm 31:9; 32:26), although sometimes the word as used in the <span>kjv<\/span> refers only to sheep and goats (Gn 30:32, 39, 43; 31:8, 10; Is 7:25; 43:23).<\/p>\n<p>Probably several kinds of cattle were domesticated in the Holy Land. Small, short-legged, black or brown shorthorn cattle were found in the southern part of Judah; that type submitted easily to the yoke and was prominent in agricultural operations. Along the coast a larger variety was found, and the wild districts east of the Jordan River were populated with a breed of huge black cattle.<\/p>\n<p>Cattle breeding was widely practiced by the patriarchs (cf. Gn 32:15; Jb 21:10). Strict laws in Mesopotamia, as well as in Israel, penalized the owner of a bull that gored a man or other cattle (Ex 21:28-36). Bulls were sometimes employed figuratively as pictures of strength or violence (Dt 33:17; Pss 22:12; 68:30; Is 10:13). For breeding purposes one bull is normally adequate for about 30 cows, but many more were kept since bulls were widely used in Israel for sacrifices. They might be used as a general sacrifice (Lv 22:23; Nm 23:1) or for special sacrifices (Jgs 6:25; 1 Sm 1:24). Particular sacrifices were offered at the consecration of priests (Ex 29:1), consecration of an altar (Nm 7), purification of the Levites (Nm 8), sin offerings (Lv 16), day of the new moon (Nm 28:11-14), Passover (Nm 28:19), Feast of Weeks (Nm 28:27), Feast of Trumpets (Nm 29:1-2), Day of Atonement (Nm 29:7-9), and the Feast of Tabernacles (Nm 29:12-38). The Feast of Tabernacles required the largest number of bulls for burnt offerings of all the annual feasts, with a total of 71 being slaughtered during the course of eight days.<\/p>\n<p>Calves were sometimes referred to as “sons of the herd” in the original Hebrew (Gn 18:8; 1 Sm 6:7; 14:32). The calf, a symbol of peacefulness (Is 11:6), was also used figuratively to refer to the weak (Ps 68:30). A calf’s head decorated the back of Solomon’s throne (1 Kgs 10:19). Calves were sometimes fattened in stalls to keep them from running off weight in the field (Am 6:4; Mal 4:2; Lk 15:23) or were kept around the house; the witch of Endor kept a calf in her house that she killed and served to Saul and his men (1 Sm 28:24-25). Calves supplied veal (Gn 18:7), considered a delicacy by the wealthy; Amos referred to stall-fattened calves in a denunciation of luxurious and careless living (Am 6:4). Calves also supplied meat for all Saul’s armies at the great slaughter of the Philistines (1 Sm 14:32). The “fatted calf” served roasted or boiled was gourmet fare, suitable for the finest banquet (Gn 18:7; Mt 22:4; Lk 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Cattle were subject to the law of firstlings (Ex 13:12). They were a mark of wealth (Gn 13:2) and were considered proper booty of war (Jos 8:2). Aaron, the first high priest, made a golden calf as a rival to the ark of the covenant (Ex 32; Dt 9:16, 21). Even though he represented the calf as an image of the invisible God, it was especially offensive because the calf was a fertility symbol related to Egyptian and Canaanite practices. Two calves were later made by Jeroboam I of Israel (930–909 <span>BC<\/span>) for his shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:28-33). Hosea’s prophetic denunciations of calf worship were directed at those shrines (Hos 8:5-6; 13:2).<\/p>\n<p>An ox is an adult castrated bull. A steer is a young ox. Oxen were used to do work (Nm 7:3; Dt 22:10; 25:4), though for moving heavy objects, cows were typically favored over bulls because of their more docile nature. Oxen were also used as pack animals (1 Chr 12:40, although they did not have the endurance of the ass, camel, or mule. They usually fed on grass (Nm 22:4; Ps 106:20), but they also ate straw (Is 11:7) and salted fodder (Is 30:24) and could be kept in a stable (Lk 13:15). Oxen could not be offered as sacrifices because they had been castrated (Lv 22:24). They could be used for food but were rarely eaten. Possession of an ox and an ass was regarded as the bare minimum for existence in the ancient Palestinian agriculture economy (Jb 24:3; cf. Ex 20:17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Agriculture; Food and Food Preparation; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Chameleon\">Chameleon<\/p>\n<p>Lizard characterized by its ability to change color according to its surroundings <em>(Chameleon vulgaris).<\/em> To the Israelites the chameleon was ritually unclean (Lv 11:30). The Hebrew word for chameleon is derived from a word meaning “to pant.” A lizard’s lungs are very large, and in ancient times lizards were believed to live on air. A chameleon’s eyes move independently of each other; so at times one eye may be turned upward and the other downward. Chameleons live in trees and bushes, clinging to branches with their long tails.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Coral\">Coral<\/p>\n<p>Calcareous (lime-containing) skeletons of relatively simple marine organisms <em>(Corallium rubrum).<\/em> Red coral from the Mediterranean and Red Seas is widely used for jewelry and for medicinal purposes. While the animal is alive, the coral is green in color and shrublike in appearance, looking rather like an underwater plant since the coral animals are immobil. When the coral is removed from the water, it becomes hard and red in color.<\/p>\n<p>In ancient times coral was sometimes used as money, along with precious stones, pearls, and gold. Some believe the biblical reference in Lamentations 4:7 (<span>rsv<\/span>) is to pearls rather than to coral, but it is probable that the references in Job 28:18 and Ezekiel 27:16 are to the red coral (see <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cricket\">Cricket<\/p>\n<p>Insect of the order Orthptera related to grasshoppers and locusts. According to Leviticus 11:22, the cricket was edible. The reference may be to one of the growth stages of the locust.<\/p>\n<p>The <span>kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word as “beetle.” Beetles are insects with chewing mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the fore pair being hard and sheathlike and the hind pair being membranous and folded under the fore pair. Some beetles are carnivorous, others are chiefly herbivorous. Some are aquatic, some produce a secretion that blisters the skin, some damage fabrics, some damage crops, and some feed on other insects that are harmful to humans. In ancient Egypt the beetle, or sacred scarab, was a symbol of the sun god Ra. Scarab seals and amulets were extremely popular in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Crocodile\">Crocodile<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all existing reptiles <em>(Crocodilus vulgaris),<\/em> attaining a length of well over 20 feet (6 meters). Crocodiles are characterized by large lizardlike bodies supported by short legs. The head terminates in a flattened snout armed with strong conical teeth, each of which is implanted in a distinct socket. New teeth growing from beneath continually replace those in use. The toes are webbed. The back and tail are protected by quadrangular horny shields of varying sizes arranged in regular rows and in contact with one another at the edges. The eyes are covered with movable lids that can be closed when the animal enters the water.<\/p>\n<p>The crocodile spends most of its time in the water where it feeds mainly on fish but also on aquatic birds and even small animals that come down to the water’s edge to drink. It is surprisingly fast and agile on dry land, even though its legs are so short that its belly and tail drag across the earth leaving a distinct path.<\/p>\n<p>Until the beginning of the 20th century, the crocodile was found in the marshes and small coastal rivers of western Palestine. A first-century Roman writer, Pliny, referred to a place in the Holy Land called Crocodeilopolis (“crocodile city”) to the south of Mt Carmel, and visitors to the Holy Land as late as the 19th century reported seeing crocodiles in that general region.<\/p>\n<p>The description of “Leviathan” in Job 41 seems to be based on the crocodile (thus the translation of the <span>nlt<\/span>). The “dragon” of Ezekiel 29:3, used figuratively of the Egyptian pharaoh, may be a reference to the crocodile.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Deer\">Deer<\/p>\n<p>Large ruminant (cud-chewing) animals. Only the males have antlers (branching horns). Deer antlers grow annually and are solid, in contrast to those of the antelope and the gazelle. Fully developed antlers are devoid of any covering of skin or horn and, for all practical purposes, may be regarded as a mass of dead bone carried for a certain time by the living animal.<\/p>\n<p>The end of the deer’s muzzle is naked in all species. The stomach is divided into a series of compartments, some of which are used to store partly chewed food. The food is later regurgitated, rechewed, and finally swallowed into a section of the stomach where true digestion takes place.<\/p>\n<p>Three species of deer were known in Palestine: the red deer <em>(Cervus elaphus),<\/em> the Persian fallow deer <em>(Dama mesopotamica),<\/em> and the roe deer <em>(Capreolus capreolus).<\/em> All are now extinct there. The last deer were hunted in the Holy Land in 1914. The red deer referred to in the Bible as “hart” (male), “stag” (male), or “hind” (female) stood about four feet (1.2 meters) high at the shoulder. It was gregarious (living in herds or flocks), each group remaining in a definite territory. Red deer grazed and browsed during the morning and late afternoon (Lam 1:6). The sexes remained in separate herds. The red deer was known for its leaping (Is 35:6) and sure-footedness in the mountains (Ps 18:33; Sg 2:8-9, 17; 8:14; Hb 3:19).<\/p>\n<p>The antlers of the Persian fallow deer (1 Kgs 4:23) were large, flattened, and palmated (shaped like an open palm with fingers extended), and its coat was a yellowbrown. It traveled in small groups, feeding mainly on grass in the morning and evening.<\/p>\n<p>The roe deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23) was a small, graceful animal, dark reddish brown in summer and yellowish gray in winter. Its antlers were about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long and had three points. The roe deer preferred sparsely wooded valleys and the lower slopes of mountains, grazing in open grasslands. It usually associated in family groups made up of the doe and her offspring. They were shy, yet very curious. The roe deer barked like a dog when disturbed, and they were excellent swimmers.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the roe deer is actually referred to in such passages as 1 Kings 4:23; references may be to the fallow deer, although that animal does not seem to have lived in the southern part of Palestine around the Sinai Desert because of its need for ample amounts of food and water. Fallow deer were found in northern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The hart (the male red deer) was listed among the clean beasts that Jewish law permitted as food (Dt 12:15, 22; 14:5), but deer were not listed among the animals appropriate for sacrifice. The hind (female red deer) normally gave birth to one calf at a time, though twins were born with some degree of regularity (Jb 39:1; Ps 29:9, <span>kjv<\/span>; Jer 14:5). The gestation period was about 40 weeks. When it was about to give birth, the hind looked for a secure hiding place, preferably in the dense undergrowth of the forest where it could find natural protection for the tiny calf. During the first few days after birth, the mother never went far from her young. The fawn was able to stand on its own legs a few hours after birth. The solicitous care by the hind for her calf during the first days of its life is hinted at in a touching way in Jeremiah 14:4-5, where only a severe drought is said to drive the hind from her calf. Job 39:1-4 describes the calving of the hinds. The hind illustrated grace and charm (Gn 49:21; Prv 5:19), and its dark, gentle eyes and graceful limbs were used to describe the beauty of a woman (Prv 5:18-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dog\">Dog<\/p>\n<p>Probably the earliest domesticated animal <em>(Canis familiaris),<\/em> used very early in hunting. The modern dog is believed to have come from the Indian wolf <em>(Canis lupus pallipes).<\/em> The dogs of biblical times probably looked like a modern German shepherd, with short pointed ears, a pointed nose, and a long tail.<\/p>\n<p>The dog was generally looked down upon in biblical times (Prv 26:11; 2 Pt 2:22). The biblical writers did not share modern sentiments about dogs being man’s best friends. The dog was pictured as a scavenger, haunting streets and dumps (Ex 22:31; 1 Kgs 22:38; Mt 15:26; Lk 16:21). Human corpses could become the spoil of dogs (2 Kgs 9:35-36). In general, dogs served the same function as vultures and other birds of prey. Most of the 41 references in the Scriptures to dogs show strong disfavor. Dogs were considered cowardly, filthy creatures.<\/p>\n<p>Dogs used in hunting occur in paintings in Egyptian tombs, and there is a reference to dogs herding sheep in Job 30:1. One good quality of dogs highly esteemed by the Israelites was watchfulness (Is 56:10). In general, however, in biblical times “dog” was a term of contempt (1 Sm 17:43; 2 Sm 16:9) and was used of overly submissive persons (2 Sm 9:8; 2 Kgs 8:13) and of evil persons (Is 56:10-11; Mt 7:6; Phil 3:2; Rv 22:15).<\/p>\n<p>Dogs, like pigs, were voracious and omnivorous (eating any kind of food). In response to a Gentile woman’s request that he heal her daughter, Jesus used the metaphor of throwing household food scraps to dogs (Mt 15:22-28; Mk 7:25-30). At the time of Jesus, the word “dog” was a standard Jewish term of contempt for Gentiles who, like dogs, were considered unclean, although the diminutive form of the word, used by Jesus, softened this considerably. Seeing her faith, Jesus granted the woman’s request, giving a non-Jew some of “the children’s bread.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Donkey\">Donkey<\/p>\n<p>Beast of burden. The donkey of the Holy Land <em>(Equus asinus)<\/em> was quite different from the European donkey of today, which is usually a small, stubborn animal. In biblical times the donkey was a beautiful, stately, friendly animal. Its color was usually reddish brown. Three wild races have been described, all from Africa. The race from northwest Africa is extinct; the one from northeast Africa, if not extinct, is close to extinction; the Somalian race, which survives, did not play an important part in domestication. The northeast African race, the Nubian donkey, was evidently domesticated in the Nile River region in early historic times. The donkey was used as a mount from the time of domestication on. It is first mentioned in the Bible among the animals that Abraham acquired in Egypt (Gn 12:16). The donkey was primarily a beast of burden, driven but not bridled. From the time of the Middle Kingdom on (c. 2040 <span>BC<\/span>), it was used for riding in Egypt, but only the Jews and Nubians rode donkeys regularly. The donkey was also used for threshing grain and for pulling the plow. In Arab countries today peasants plow with a donkey and a cow or camel hitched together. In Israel the law forbade plowing with a donkey and an ox hitched together (Dt 22:10). Until the time of Solomon (960 <span>BC<\/span>), horses were not used in Palestine. From that time on, the horse was ridden by warriors; the donkey was used by those who were traveling peaceably.<\/p>\n<p>The donkey was held in high regard by the Jews and was considered an economic asset. An individual had to have a donkey for minimum existence (Jb 24:3), and wealth was frequently counted by the number of donkeys one possessed (Gn 12:16; 24:35). The donkey was considered an acceptable gift (Gn 32:13-15). It was allowed to rest on the Sabbath (Dt 5:14). Women in biblical times often used the donkey as a riding animal (Jos 15:18; 1 Sm 25:23; 2 Kgs 4:24); often a special driver would help a woman guide the animal, running along at its side. If a married couple possessed only one donkey, the husband usually walked alongside while the wife rode (Ex 4:20).<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel returning from Babylon had ten times as many donkeys as horses and camels (Ezr 2:66-67; Neh 7:68-69). Job’s wealth was indicated by the fact that he had 500 she-donkeys before catastrophe hit him (Jb 1:3); after his recovery he had 1,000 donkeys (Jb 42:12). Joseph’s brothers used donkeys to transport the grain they purchased in Egypt (Gn 42:26; 43:24). Abigail transported food on donkeys to David and his troops during their conflict with Saul (1 Sm 25:18). David assigned one of the 12 managers of his royal estates to look after his donkeys exclusively (1 Chr 27:30).<\/p>\n<p>The onager, or Syrian wild donkey <em>(Equus hemionus hemihippus)<\/em>, is an intermediate between the true horse and the true donkey. Its ears are longer than those of a horse but shorter than those of a donkey. The front hooves are narrow; there are chestnuts (callouslike spots on the inside of the knees) on the front legs only, and the tail is short haired for a long distance from its root so that it appears to be tufted.<\/p>\n<p>The Sumerians (ancient Mesopotamians) were able to domesticate the onager, which was eventually replaced by the horse. It was used to draw chariots in Ur; a number of onagers were buried with their vehicles in a royal grave that dates from about 2500 <span>BC<\/span>. Later the wild onager was a favorite hunter’s prize for Babylonian and Assyrian kings.<\/p>\n<p>The onager was very common in the steppe lands near Israel, where it was described as a freedom-loving desert animal (Jb 24:5; 39:5-8; Ps 104:11; Is 32:14; Jer 2:24; Hos 8:9). Ishmael was described as “free and untamed as a wild donkey” (Gn 16:12, <span>nlt<\/span>)—that is, one who could not adjust to domestic life. Drought seems to have been responsible for the population decline of the onager in biblical times (Jer 14:6). The modern onager <em>(Equus hemionus onager)<\/em> is slightly larger than the Syrian wild donkey that is extinct.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dragon\">Dragon<\/p>\n<p>Any one of a number of monstrous land and sea creatures. In biblical usage, “dragon” does not refer to the huge, fire-breathing, winged reptile of European folklore. The translators of the <span>kjv<\/span> used the term to translate two Hebrew words that are usually rendered more precisely in modern translations. One word referred to desert animals; most scholars agree with the <span>niv<\/span> that “jackals” is its proper meaning (Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; Jer 9:11; Mal 1:3). <em>See<\/em> Jackal (below).<\/p>\n<p>The other Hebrew word translated “dragon” is harder to define. It was frequently used in reference to serpents (so translated in the <span>rsv<\/span>: Ex 7:9-12; Dt 32:33; Ps 91:13). In other <span>rsv<\/span> passages it is translated “sea monster” (Gn 1:21; Jb 7:12; Ps 148:7). The exact identity of such sea monsters is not known. Several <span>rsv<\/span> passages retain the English “dragon.” In two of them (Ps 74:13; Is 27:1), the context indicates that sea monsters are meant. In three others (Is 51:9; Ez 29:3; 32:2) “dragon” seems to refer to the crocodile, a figurative reference to the Egyptian pharaoh at the time of the exodus. Jeremiah 51:34 (translated “monster” in the <span>rsv<\/span>) may also refer to a voracious creature such as a crocodile. <em>See<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\n<p>Babylonian myths described monsters and dragons in primordial conflict with the god Marduk; they represented the principle of evil. In its figurative usages in Scripture, “dragon” has a similar significance, especially in the prophetic books. In the book of Revelation it is a symbol of Satan, the archenemy of God and his people (Rv 12:3-17; 13:2, 4, 11; 16:13; 20:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fish\">Fish<\/p>\n<p>Aquatic animals frequently mentioned in the Bible without names or descriptions that enable us to identify the particular species. Since time immemorial, fish have constituted one of the staple foods of humanity, and they still serve as the chief source of protein in many parts of the world. The trade in fish was highly developed in biblical times. For example, one of the gates in Jerusalem was called the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3; Zep 1:10). The law in Leviticus 11:9-12 permitted the Jews to eat fish, but only those having both fins and scales. Scaleless fish such as catfish were forbidden, even though they had fins.<\/p>\n<p>Egyptian paintings depict various methods of fishing, and the Philistines fished in the Mediterranean Sea. Since the people of Israel were not a seafaring nation, it is safe to assume that most of their fish came from freshwater lakes and rivers, especially the Sea of Galilee. Some 36 species of fish have been identified in that lake, including varieties of perch, carp, barbel, “sardine,” and catfish.<\/p>\n<p>The method of fishing characteristic of NT times was the dragnet. After a boat had put out into the deep (Lk 5:4), a large net would be thrown out from it and then dragged toward shore by the rowers in the boat, possibly with the help of a crew in another boat. The catch was sorted out on shore (Mt 13:47-48). Fishing was usually carried out at night when the coolness of the water brought fish closer to the surface and when they could not see the approaching nets.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews also fished by hook and line (Mt 17:27), a few by spear (Jb 41:7), and some by the throw net (Ez 47:10). Habakkuk refers to hook-and-line fishing, netting, and seining (1:15).<\/p>\n<p>Very early in the history of the Christian church the fish became a symbol for Christ and the faith. It was scratched on the walls of Roman catacombs and may be seen today decorating walls, altars, pews, and vestments. The symbol came into use because the Greek word for “fish” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ichthus<\/span><em>)<\/em> is composed of the first letter of each word in the Greek phrase “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior.” <em>See<\/em> Whale (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Flea\">Flea<\/p>\n<p>Tiny, irritating insect (1 Sm 24:14; 26:20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many species of fleas occur in Palestine, the most common being <em>Pulex irritans.<\/em> About a thousand species are known around the world. Fleas are wingless parasites that have sharp jaws and suck out blood from the bodies of humans and animals. The body is wedge shaped, enabling the flea to burrow into folds of skin and hide there. The eggs, laid by the female in dust heaps in the corners of rooms, hatch into small, white larvae that pupate (a nonfeeding stage) in a cocoon. Soon adult fleas appear that immediately attach themselves to the body of a host. The female requires blood for the development of her eggs.<\/p>\n<p>A flea bite is painful and causes some swelling and itching. Fleas are attracted by warmth. With favorable moisture and temperature, adult fleas can live a year or longer without food, but they are voracious feeders. The most dangerous fleas are those of the rat that transmit the organism responsible for bubonic plague. There were 41 recorded epidemics of bubonic plague before the Christian era.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fly\">Fly<\/p>\n<p>Insects of the order Diptera, which have one pair of wings. Many winged insects of other orders, however, are also called flies, such as the dragonfly or butterfly.<\/p>\n<p>As in almost all parts of the world, flies are abundant in Palestine. One of the most numerous is the common housefly <em>(Musca domestica),<\/em> found chiefly around dung heaps and garbage. The female lays her eggs, out of which emerge white maggots that feed on refuse. After a few days the maggot develops into a cocoon out of which emerges the adult housefly. In the summer the whole cycle lasts about 12 days, so that a fly can breed about 20 generations a year.<\/p>\n<p>Another fly common to Palestine is the botfly (family Oestridae). It causes much discomfort among livestock by irritating them and spreading diseases. Tabanid flies (family Tabanidae), including the horsefly (genus <em>Tabanus<\/em>) and related species, are also found in Palestine. Both the botfly and horsefly are known as gadflies because of the persistent distress they inflict. Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar is spoken of as a gadfly in view of his invasion of Egypt (Jer 46:20).<\/p>\n<p>The fourth plague in Egypt just before the exodus featured “swarms of flies” (Ex 8:21-31, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Pss 78:45; 105:31). Those swarms may have been made up of any or all the flies mentioned above. The maggots mentioned in Job 25:6 and Isaiah 14:11 and the worms in Exodus 16:24 and Job 7:5 and 17:14 were probably fly larvae.<\/p>\n<p>A proverb quoted in Ecclesiastes 10:1 probably refers to the housefly, which would be attracted to an open, perfumed ointment bottle. Once inside it would drown and eventually decay, causing the ointment to spoil and stink. The fly is also referred to in Isaiah 7:18 where it symbolizes Egypt. Isaiah may have had in mind a horsefly <em>(Tabanus arenivagus)<\/em> that attacks both humans and animals.<\/p>\n<p>Philistine inhabitants of the city of Ekron worshiped a god named Baal-zebul, meaning “Lord of the high places.” The Hebrews mockingly spoke of Baal-zebub, meaning “Lord of the flies” (2 Kgs 1:2). The NT form is Beelzebub (e.g., Mt 10:25; 12:24, 27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fox\">Fox<\/p>\n<p>Small, doglike carnivore with a bushy tail that is about half its body length. The red fox of the Holy Land <em>(Vulpes palaetinae)<\/em> is similar to the North American red fox; it is smaller than a wolf and is normally a nocturnal solitary animal. The omnivorous fox eats almost any kind of food—fruits, plants, mice, beetles, and birds—but seldom touches carrion. It loves the sweet juice of grapes, but it also burrows underground tunnels that can destroy the vines (Sg 2:15). The fox is intelligent and known for its slyness (Lk 13:32). It has considerable endurance and can run at speeds up to 30 miles (48 kilometers) per hour. The Jews rebuilding Jerusalem’s wall were taunted by the wisecrack that even a fox jumping on their wall would knock it over (Neh 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptian fox <em>(Vulpes niloticus)<\/em> is found in the central and southern parts of the Holy Land. It is somewhat smaller than the common red fox. Its back is rust colored and its belly light. The Syrian fox <em>(Vulpes flavescens)<\/em> that lives in the northern part of the Holy Land is shiny gold in color.<\/p>\n<p>Some OT references such as Psalm 63:10 and Lamentations 5:18 are translated “fox” in the <span>kjv<\/span> but probably refer to jackals. Jackals, not foxes, hunt in packs and tend to act as scavengers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Frog\">Frog<\/p>\n<p>Amphibian (genus <em>Rana<\/em>), living part of its life in the water and part on land.<\/p>\n<p>Frogs and toads are covered with soft, hairless skin and lack a tail in the adult stage. The hind legs are much longer and more powerfully developed than the forelegs so that the animals are able to jump large distances. It has been suggested that the frog referred to in Scripture is an edible one, <em>Rana ridibunda,<\/em> one of the aquatic frogs found in Egypt and in the stagnant waters of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The female frog lays her eggs in the water; after about a week the eggs hatch into tadpoles. Gradually through metamorphosis the tail is lost and limbs are acquired. Frogs must maintain a moist skin since they take oxygen through the skin as well as through their lungs; thus they must always remain close to water. They feed on insects and worms.<\/p>\n<p>Frogs are found throughout the Palestinian lowlands, where their croaking is heard in the spring and on summer evenings. The Israelites seem to have associated frogs primarily with sliminess and foulness. They fell into the category of creeping or swarming creatures, which in general were ritually unclean (Lv 11:29-31). Since the frog was not specifically listed, however, rabbis did not consider it one of the animals that defiled human beings through contact.<\/p>\n<p>In Revelation 16:13 certain foul spirits are said to look like frogs. The ancient Egyptians made the frog a symbol of life and birth and an image of Heqet, the patron goddess of birth. She is depicted with a frog’s head giving life to the newborn. Thus that deity was discredited when the power of God afflicted Egypt in the second of the ten plagues on the Egyptians with the very animal that was her symbol (Ex 8:1-14; Pss 78:45; 105:30). The frog in question may have been the spotted frog of Egypt <em>(Rana punctata,<\/em> or <em>Rana ridibunda).<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gazelle\">Gazelle<\/p>\n<p>Small, dainty, graceful antelope with hollow recurved horns on both sexes. Two varieties exist in the Holy Land, the dorcas gazelle <em>(Gazella dorcas),<\/em> which is pale fawn in color and up to 22 inches (56 centimeters) tall, and the Arabian gazelle <em>(Gazella arabica),<\/em> which is a dark smoky color and up to 25 inches (63.5 centimeters) tall.<\/p>\n<p>Gazelles are still quite common throughout the desert and steppe areas of the Holy Land, especially in the Negev Desert. Herds usually consist of from 5 to 10 animals, but some varieties assemble in large migratory herds in the fall to relocate to lower elevations and new feeding grounds. Gazelles are herbivorous (plant eating). They are very shy and post guards to warn the herd of approaching danger.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times the gazelle was probably the game animal most hunted by the Jews (Prv 6:5; Is 13:14). Pharaoh Tutankhamen hunted gazelles and ostriches. The gazelle is said to have graced Solomon’s table (1 Kgs 4:23). Gazelles were not easy to catch because of their great speed (2 Sm 2:18; 1 Chr 12:8; Prv 6:5); they surpass the deer in swiftness. They were trapped in various ways—encircled with nets, driven into enclosures with pitfalls, or forced into narrow valleys and shot with arrows. The Bedouin hunt gazelle with falcons and dogs; the falcon annoys the gazelle, striking it on the head and injuring it so that the dogs can overtake it.<\/p>\n<p>The gazelle is referred to in Song of Songs 2:9, 17; 4:5; 7:3; 8:14, where it is an image of feminine beauty.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gecko\">Gecko<\/p>\n<p>Reptile of the family Gekkonidae, referred to in Leviticus 11:30. In Jewish food law it was a ritually unclean lizard. There are seven species of geckos in the Holy Land (including <em>Hemidactylus turcicus<\/em> and <em>Ptyodactylus hasselquistii,<\/em> all insectivorous—insect eating). The gecko makes a low mourning sound by vibrating its tongue rapidly against the roof of its mouth. In legend the gecko was said to cause leprosy by crawling across a person’s body.<\/p>\n<p>Another name for the gecko is the wall lizard, so named because it can walk upside down on ceilings with the aid of the suction discs on its toes—but it often plops down into the middle of the home. Since it was considered unclean, such an intrusion would have been a disgusting nuisance to Jewish households (Lv 11:31-38).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gnat\">Gnat<\/p>\n<p>Any very small fly, in common and biblical usage. According to the <span>nlt<\/span>, the third plague in Egypt before the exodus consisted of gnats (Ex 8:16-18; Ps 105:31). The <span>kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word there as “lice,” but the breeding pattern described in Exodus 8—insects rising from the dust—seems to fit gnats better than lice. Since “gnat” is a general term, the small flies of that plague may have included several small species such as mosquitos, harvester gnats, midges, or sand flies.<\/p>\n<p>The sand fly inflicts a far more painful bite than the mosquito. Further, it does not betray itself by a buzzing noise in flight and is so small that it penetrates most mosquito netting.<\/p>\n<p>Gnats were drawn to wine while it was fermenting. The Pharisees in particular would strain their wine to avoid consuming unclean insects (Mt 23:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Goat\">Goat<\/p>\n<p>Cloven-hooved mammals (genus <em>Capra<\/em>) with large eyes and big, floppy ears that constantly twitch. Both males and females have backward arching horns. The Palestinian goat is a ruminant (cud-chewing animal) of lighter build than the sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was probably the earliest ruminant to be domesticated. Its wild ancestor seems to have been the Gezoar goat <em>(Capra aegagrus).<\/em> Wild goats are believed to have been domesticated very early in Palestine. The goat of Bible times was probably the Syrian or Mamber variety <em>(Capra hircus mambrica).<\/em> Domesticated goats may have as many as four kids in a litter, whereas wild goats bear only one or two.<\/p>\n<p>The Palestinian goat was commonly black. Speckled and spotted goats were a rarity, and for that reason Jacob’s request for those goats in Genesis 30:32 appeared very modest. There may also have been red goats (cf. 1 Sm 16:12; 19:13, where goat’s hair was used to imitate David’s hair, which was “ruddy” or auburn).<\/p>\n<p>Almost every part of the goat was used by the Israelites. The whole goat was used for sacrifice. Its flesh served as meat (Lv 7:23; Dt 14:4), and it was the principal source of milk (Prv 27:27). Goats were sheared in the late spring, and the goat hair was used for weaving tent cloth and for various domestic purposes (Ex 36:14; 1 Sm 19:13, 16). The tabernacle at Mt Sinai was made of goat’s hair blankets (Ex 26:7).<\/p>\n<p>Adult male goats were generally not eaten because of their strong flavor and toughness and also because they were necessary to insure the flock’s increase. Young kids, however, were usually the chief meat for a feast and were offered to visitors as a symbol of hospitality. Goat milk is richer than the milk of cows and sheep and evidently had broader uses. A good goat gives three quarts of milk a day, from which a rich butter and buttermilk can be made. The average Hebrew family could have lived almost entirely on a single goat’s production.<\/p>\n<p>Goatskin was tanned as leather, and the whole hide was turned into a skin bottle by sewing shut leg and neck apertures (Gn 21:14; Jos 9:4). Goatskin had many uses, including the construction of Hebrew musical instruments. The nebal, a large harp, was made with goatskin for its base sound. Drums had goatskin coverings.<\/p>\n<p>Goats were herded with sheep in biblical times, but each group remained separate following its own bell-laden leader. Jesus was evidently referring to their common herding in his description of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Because of their wool, sheep are valued more than goats. However, where pasture and water are scarce and thorny shrubs dominate over grass, sheep are difficult to keep and goats become important. They can live under conditions that suit neither cows nor sheep, producing large quantities of milk. The goat does not supply fat as the sheep does, and since its hair is coarse its wool is rather scarce. Goat-hair cloth called cilicium was used to make tents.<\/p>\n<p>Goats have voracious appetites. They also were responsible for much damage done to the land of Palestine, breaking down terraces, destroying forests, and bringing about soil erosion by eating off all cover.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was recognized as a form of wealth, subject to the law of firstlings (Nm 18:17). It had to be eight days old before it could be offered as a sacrifice. A year-old male goat was one of the animals offered at the Passover (28:22), and two goats were offered on the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:7-10). The goat was also used for other specific sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p>The ibex, a type of wild goat <em>(Capra ibex nubiana),<\/em> still lives in small numbers on the cliffs close to the Dead Sea. That it was known in ancient times is evident from rock carvings. It is distinguished from the true wild goat by having a more compact rump and horns that are slender and curved back. Its slender legs and sharp cloven hooves enable it to cling to narrow rock ledges, to jump between them, and to climb steep cliffs.<\/p>\n<p>Usually the ibex is found in rugged mountain country among rocky crags and meadows just below the snow line (Ps 104:18). In Job 39:1 they are referred to as “mountain goats.” They frequently gather in herds of 5 to 20. They graze and browse, being active in the afternoon and sometimes feeding through the night. The large horn of the ibex was at one period made into the shofar that was blown in the second Jerusalem temple to announce the new year and the jubilee year.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was often used in a figurative and symbolic sense by the writers of the Bible: in Song of Songs 4:1 and 6:5 for the bride’s black hair; in Matthew 25:31-46 for the wicked; and in Ezekiel 34:17 and Daniel 8:5-8 for various human leaders.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Grasshopper\">Grasshopper<\/p>\n<p>Large insects of the Orthoptera order. They have chewing or biting mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the front pair of which is narrow and somewhat thickened and the hind pair membranous and used for flying. When not in use the flight wings are folded beneath the protective front wings like a fan against the body. By rubbing their wings together, male grasshoppers produce sounds that both males and females can detect. Grasshoppers pass through a partial metamorphosis; the egg hatches into a juvenile nymph that looks like an adult except for its smaller size and undeveloped wings. After several months the nymph becomes a winged adult.<\/p>\n<p>The terms “grasshopper” and “locust” are often used interchangeably. Actually the locust is a kind of grasshopper. Also confusing is the fact that other insects such as cicadas are sometimes called locusts. The difference between grasshoppers and locusts depends more on behavior than appearance. Grasshoppers are individual insects that lead solitary lives and do not migrate. The same insects when migrating in a swarm are called migratory grasshoppers or locusts. Elimination of their food supply by drought, flood, or fire may lead to migration. Climatic factors such as a warm dry winter also stimulate migrations.<\/p>\n<p>Grasshoppers and locusts have been a staple food in the Middle East and also among the Indians of the American Southwest. To the Israelites the grasshopper was considered ritually clean and could be eaten (Lv 11:22).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hare\">Hare<\/p>\n<p>Animal of the genus and species <em>Lepus europaeus judaeus, Lepus capensis,<\/em> and <em>Lepus arabicus.<\/em> It is found in open country, often near or on cultivated lands, and in woods, usually deciduous rather than evergreen. It is an herbivorous rodent and is different from the rabbit, which is not found in Palestine. Although it is not a true ruminant according to modern classification (because it does not have a four-chambered stomach), the hare does rechew its food. It has a process of partial regurgitation of material too hard for the cells in the stomach to absorb initially; thus, the hare actually chews food previously swallowed.<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern hares have very long ears and large hind feet; their feet are well furred. They are similar to American jackrabbits, which are true hares. Hares do not dig or occupy burrows the way rabbits do. Hares are mainly nocturnal and spend their inactive hours hiding in vegetation. They eat grasses and herbaceous matter as well as twigs and young bark of woody plants. Hares breed with great rapidity—the young attaining sexual maturity at six months after birth.<\/p>\n<p>The hare was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:6; Dt 14:7), evidently because although it appeared to chew its cud, it did not have cloven hooves. Consumption of hares has also been forbidden among the Arabs, Chinese, and Lapps, but the hare was widely hunted by other people in ancient and modern times. Its great speed, prolific breeding, timidity, and caution have saved it from extermination by its many enemies.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hippopotamus\">Hippopotamus<\/p>\n<p>Large beast of problematic interpretation. Some early interpreters thought it referred to the elephant, others to the wild ox, the mammoth, or any large animal. It was called “behemoth” by the <span>kjv<\/span> translators. Today it is generally agreed that the reference is to the hippopotamus <em>(Hippopotamus amphibius),<\/em> a large, thick-skinned, amphibious mammal, an ungulate (having hooflike toenails) with a large head, a bulky, hairless body, and short legs.<\/p>\n<p>The description in Job 40:15-24 fits closely the modern hippopotamus (see <span>nlt<\/span>), except for the depiction of the tail. At present the hippopotamus is found only in the rivers of Africa, but there is fossil evidence that it has existed in the Holy Land, perhaps in the swamps of northern Galilee and the Jordan Valley.<\/p>\n<p>The hippopotamus has highly developed sense organs, placed in such a way that it can see, hear, and smell almost without being seen; its eyes, ears, and nostrils can reach above water while the rest of the animal lies submerged. It has a large mouth, large tusks, and a short, heavy throat. The strong legs are so short that the belly almost reaches the ground when the animal is on the land. The hippopotamus lives on plants and herbs growing in rivers, but if food is scarce there, it forages on land, usually at night. In spite of its heavy body it is surprisingly agile on land.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Horse\">Horse<\/p>\n<p>Przewalski’s horse (<em>Equus przewalskii,<\/em> an eastern race that roamed about Mongolia until modern firearms destroyed most of them after World War I) and the tarpan (a western race of southern Russia that became extinct in the Ukraine in 1851). The domesticated horse <em>(Equus caballus)<\/em> seems to have been derived from the tarpan. The original site of domestication is believed to have been Turkestan, a region north of Afghanistan and India, now in Russia. The horse differs from the donkey in that it has shorter ears, a longer mane with a forelock, a long hairy tail, and a soft, sensitive muzzle.<\/p>\n<p>Horses were used in war not only for riding but also for pulling the heavy, springless war chariots. Two kinds of horses were needed for these different purposes, and the Hebrews distinguished between chariot horses and cavalry horses.<\/p>\n\n<p>The Lord warned the early Israelites against unnecessarily amassing military strength in the form of horses and thereby following the oppressive tactics of the powerful Egyptians (Dt 17:14-16), but the demands of war caused both David and Solomon to import horses from Egypt into their kingdoms and to breed them. Solomon greatly increased the number of horses in the Jewish kingdom and maintained large stables at various cities (1 Kgs 10:26) such as the regional defense centers of Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer (1 Kgs 9:15-19). Ahab’s horses are mentioned in 1 Kings 18:5, and records of Shalmaneser III state that Ahab furnished 2,000 chariots to a coalition against Assyria.<\/p>\n<p>In early Israel, the horse was opposed as a symbol of pagan luxury and of dependence on physical power for defense (Dt 17:16; 1 Sm 8:11; Ps 20:7; Is 31:1). Horse trading, mentioned as early as Genesis 47:17, was carried on by Solomon between Egypt and the Syro-Hittite principalities (1 Kgs 10:28-29). Most biblical references to horses refer to their use in war, but horses were also used for transportation. Riding seems to have been less popular than the use of chariots. Cavalry units were not introduced until the 12th century <span>BC<\/span> by the Medes. Joseph rode in Pharaoh’s second horse-drawn chariot (Gn 41:43), and Absalom made a display by riding a horse-drawn chariot (2 Sm 15:1). Naaman traveled by horse and chariot (2 Kgs 5:9). Later, horses were so common in Jerusalem that the royal palace had a special horse gate (2 Chr 23:15), and a gate of the city itself was known as the Horse Gate (Neh 3:28; Jer 31:40). Mordecai rode a royal horse of King Xerxes as a sign of honor (Est 6:8-11). Horses are often spoken of figuratively (Ps 32:9; “mare,” Sg 1:9; “stallions,” Jer 5:8; 12:5), especially in the context of judgment (Hb 3:8; Zec 1:8; 6:1-8; Rv 6:2-8; 9:17; 19:11-16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Warfare; Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hyena\">Hyena<\/p>\n<p>Stocky carnivore <em>(Hyaena hyaena)<\/em> with coarse hair, an erect mane, and long hairs along the neck and back. Hyenas live in holes among rocks and banks. They are mainly nocturnal but are ordinarily neither noisy nor aggressive. Their cry, however, is a disagreeable, unearthly sound. Hyenas usually feed on carrion, crushing bones with their powerful jaws. If the carrion supply is inadequate, they will kill sheep, goats, or other small animals. When threatened, hyenas growl and erect their mane, but they rarely fight. They are massively built with forelegs longer than the hind legs.<\/p>\n<p>Known as scavengers in Africa, hyenas eat domestic refuse in the villages. In Palestine the striped hyena is a common predator, preferring rocky territory and even rock tombs. Since hyenas were notorious for raiding the graves of the dead, all Israelites who could afford it arranged for burial in tombs protected by massive stone doors. Absalom, King David’s son who was killed by Joab in the wild, was buried under a huge pile of stones to protect his corpse from molestation by hyenas (2 Sm 18:17).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Jackal\">Jackal<\/p>\n<p>Carnivore <em>(Canis aureus)<\/em> smaller than the true wolf and with a shorter tail. It is similar to the fox but has a broader head, shorter ears, and longer legs. The fox is solitary; the jackal tends to be gregarious. Its tail can be drooping or erect, compared with the long horizontal tail of the fox. Jackals usually prowl at night, either singly, in pairs, or in packs through open savannah country. They eat small mammals, poultry, fruit, vegetables, and carrion. They spend their days in thickets and clumps of vegetation. Often they obtain scraps from kills by larger carnivores. Jackals can run at speeds of about 33 miles (53 kilometers) per hour.<\/p>\n<p>The jackal can reach a height of about 20 inches (51 centimeters), roughly the size of a German shepherd dog. Its back is pale yellow with dark, almost black, flanks. Its lips are black and its ears white on the inside. The howl of the jackal sounds like the crying of a child or the heartrending wail of the bereaved (Mi 1:8; cf. Jb 30:29). To other jackals the howl is merely an invitation calling the pack together for its nocturnal hunting.<\/p>\n<p>OT references are chiefly to jackals prowling around ruined cities and wilderness areas (Neh 2:13; Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; 34:13; 35:7; Jer 9:11; 14:6; 49:33; 51:37; Lam 4:3; 5:18; Mal 1:3). Many such references are translated “dragon” in the <span>kjv<\/span>, but “jackal” is more appropriate.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leech\">Leech<\/p>\n<p>Segmented worm (class Hirundinea) up to five inches (12.7 centimeters) long with a flat body equipped with suction pads at each end. The mouth, located at the bottom of the front suction pad, has three teeth that the leech uses to pierce the skin of its host. The leech feeds on blood, and its glands secrete an anticoagulant to prevent the blood from clotting. The ordinary medicinal leech (Hirudo medicinalis) is abundant in springs and ponds from the Negev Desert to Galilee. It adheres to the bodies of human beings and animals that submerge themselves in water, injects its anticoagulant, and sucks their blood.<\/p>\n<p>The reference in Proverbs 30:15 is uncertain (see <span>nlt<\/span>) but may be to the parasitic and greedy nature of the horse leech (genus <em>Haemopis<\/em>). The small horse leech enters its host’s mouth and nostrils from water while the animal is drinking. A leech weighing one-half ounce (14.2 grams) has been known to gorge itself with two and a half ounces (71 grams) of concentrated blood and then to exist for 15 months with no more to eat.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leopard\">Leopard<\/p>\n<p>Called <em>Panthera pardus tulliana,<\/em> it is the most widespread of all the large wildcats. In rocky areas it lives in caves, but in forested regions it lives in thick vegetation. In OT times many lived in the vicinity of Mt Hermon (Sg 4:8).<\/p>\n<p>The leopard is somewhat smaller than the tiger, measuring up to 5 feet (1.5 meters) in length with a tail of about 30 inches (.8 meter). Its body is better proportioned than that of the tiger. The leopard takes its victim by surprise from a silent ambush, often concealing itself near villages or watering places and waiting for its prey, remaining in one spot for long spans of time. The leopard is swift on the ground (Hb 1:8), agile in trees, and very graceful in its movements. Its color is yellowish speckled with black spots (Jer 13:23). Daniel and John saw visions in which leopards were symbols of world powers (Dn 7:6; Rv 13:2).<\/p>\n<p>The leopard is a wary and cunning animal, formidable and ferocious (Jer 5:6; Hos 13:7; cf. Is 11:6). The leopard is dangerous not only to domestic animals but also to humans. With its natural camouflage it can hide on the forest floor, blending into the changing light and shadows. The Israelites were terrified of the leopard because it constantly ravaged their sheep and goats. Several biblical place names suggest that they were known for the leopards in their vicinity: Nimrah, Beth-nimrah, and Nimrim, a district northeast of the Dead Sea. It has survived in the Holy Land into the present century; a few leopards still exist in remote areas near Mt Tabor and Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leviathan\">Leviathan<\/p>\n<p>Sea monster mentioned several times in the Bible (Pss 74:14; 104:26; Is 27:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). It may refer to any of the larger marine animals such as large jellyfish, whales, or sharks, or to a large reptile like the crocodile. Some scholars think “Leviathan” may refer to animals now extinct, such as ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs (marine reptiles similar to dinosaurs). The scriptural term might also refer to certain dinosaurs that spent part of their lives half-submerged in shallow lakes and oceans. Other scholars believe that most of the references are to the crocodile.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lion\">Lion<\/p>\n<p>Large, tawny-colored carnivore <em>(Panthera leo)<\/em> that preys chiefly on hoofed mammals and charges by a series of leaps and bounds. Within historic times the lion ranged in Africa, Europe, and the Holy Land. In ancient times the territories of the African and Persian lions met in the Middle East. The lion of the Holy Land was the Asiatic or Persian lion <em>(Panthera leo persica).<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The males have heavy manes that stop at the shoulders but cover much of the chest. The Persian lion cannot climb and is mainly nocturnal, returning to its lair or a thicket by day (Jer 4:7; 25:38; Na 2:11-12). This lion is about 5 feet (1.5 meters) long with a tasseled tail 30 inches (.8 meter) or so long; its shoulders may reach a height of 35 inches (.9 meter). It is one of the smallest of the lion breeds.<\/p>\n<p>Lions are usually found in pairs, though sometimes in larger numbers. A small group is known as a pride. They generally prefer open country but in Palestine evidently prowled the subtropical vegetation of the Jordan River valley. Lions, which usually hunt at dusk, kill smaller animals by a blow of the paw, larger ones by a bite in the throat. A lion does not remain in the same place for more than a few days. The animal is in its prime at about seven years of age, when it weighs from 400 to 600 pounds (181.6 to 272.4 kilograms).<\/p>\n<p>The lion does not characteristically attack humans, though like other great cats it may become a man-eater (1 Kgs 13:24-28; 20:36; 2 Kgs 17:25-26; Ps 57:4; Dn 6:7-27). Ordinarily, it attacks only out of great hunger or in self-defense. A very young lion that attacks humans can become dangerous if it develops a taste for human flesh. A very old lion, expelled from the pride because it can no longer keep up in the pursuit of antelope or gazelles, may choose humans as a relatively slow-moving prey.<\/p>\n<p>A lion generally roars only on a full stomach—that is, after it has consumed its prey (Ps 22:13; Ez 22:25; Am 3:4). Nevertheless, its roaring arouses fear (Am 3:8; 1 Pt 5:8). The lion is a bold (2 Sm 17:10; Prv 28:1), destructive animal (Ps 7:2; Jer 2:30; Hos 5:14; Mi 5:8), and the enemy of flocks (Am 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Lions were common in biblical times in all parts of the Holy Land. Hebrew has at least seven words for lion and young lion. The lion is referred to about 130 times in the OT—more than any other wild animal. Lions were evidently much less common in NT times. After gradually declining, they became extinct in Palestine shortly after <span>AD<\/span> 1300. The lion was present in Mesopotamia, however, until the end of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>Lions played an important part in the political and religious symbolism of the Near East (1 Kgs 10:19-20). In Assyria and Babylonia the lion was regarded as a royal beast (Dn 7:4). Oriental monarchs maintained artificial lion pits as places of execution (Ez 19:1-9; Dn 6:7-16). Animals for these were captured in camouflaged nets or pits. To the Jews, the lion was the mightiest of beasts (Prv 30:29-31). Thus, it symbolized leadership (Gn 49:9-10; Nm 24:9) and hence eventually became a title for Christ (Rv 5:5). It was also the ensign of Judah’s tribe and was used by King Solomon in the decoration of his house and the temple.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lizard\">Lizard<\/p>\n<p>Reptiles of the suborder Lacertilia. Their skin is covered with scales. The lizard is a useful creature because it captures harmful insects and worms. Like other reptiles, it lays eggs with shells softer than those of a bird and with no clear division between the yolk and the white. Lizards are “cold-blooded” organisms without a temperature-maintenance mechanism; hence, they become inactive in cold weather.<\/p>\n<p>Lizards can survive in barren parched countryside. In the Near East they are encountered in great numbers in the Arabian Desert, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Judean wilderness. There may be as many as 44 different species of lizards in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The Dabb lizard (genus <em>Uromastyx<\/em>), which attains a length of about 24 inches (61 centimeters), is found in the Negev Desert. It is omnivorous, an unusual trait since most lizards are insectivorous. It has a hard, rough skin, green with brown spots; a short, rounded head; and a powerful tail encircled with a row of strong spines that it uses as a weapon of defense.<\/p>\n<p>Lizards are listed as ceremonially unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:29-31). The fact that lizards crawl on their bellies made them unclean. Contact with a lizard’s carcass defiled a law-abiding Jew (Lv 11:32-36). The <span>nlt<\/span> translates the “lizards” of Leviticus 11 as “great lizard,” “gecko,” “monitor lizard,” “sand lizard,” and “chameleon.” The monitor lizard is a large lizard that lives in the deserts of southern Palestine, Sinai, and Egypt. It is up to 55 inches (1.4 meters) long with a long snout and sharp teeth. Other translators and commentators render the original Hebrew in a wide variety of ways, including “tortoise,” “ferret,” “lizard,” “snail,” “mole,” and even “water hen.” The fact that most of the original Hebrew words occur only once in Scripture makes it very difficult to be certain about their appropriate translation.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gecko (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Locust\">Locust<\/p>\n<p>An insect of the family <em>Acridiidae.<\/em> It is referred to by at least 12 different names in Scripture. The various Hebrew words may refer to different stages of its development from larva to adult or to the type of damage that it causes. Locusts are characterized by swarming and mass migration. In modern times they have caused extensive and disastrous destruction to vegetation. Grasshoppers do not swarm or migrate en masse, differentiating them from the true locusts.<\/p>\n<p>The OT mentions several different species of locusts. Leviticus 11:22 seems to refer to the slant-faced (bald) locust and also to the katydid, or long-horned grasshopper. The reference in Deuteronomy 28:42 may be to the mole cricket. In Joel 1:4 and 2:25 and in Nahum 3:16-17, successive stages of the insect’s development are described. The cutting locust (<span>kjv<\/span> “palmerworm”) of Joel is probably the first instar (stage of development), the swarming locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “locust”) are middle stages, and the hopping locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “cankerworm”) later instars but not yet fully matured insects. In the adult stage, called destroying locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “caterpillar”), the color of the locust is reddish brown, which turns to yellow with a brownish network on the wings.<\/p>\n<p>Only three of the hundreds of varieties of locusts found in Bible lands are capable of multiplying into great swarms, and only the desert locust <em>(Schistocerca gergaria)<\/em> can be considered widespread in all the Bible lands. The desert locust is native to the Sudan (Africa). It is a little over two inches (5 centimeters) long and has a wingspread of some five inches (12.7 centimeters). It shows two phases, a solitary phase and a gregarious phase, with a possible third phase known as transiens. There are differences in the immature and adult forms of the phases in color and physiology.<\/p>\n<p>The quantity and distribution of rains are important factors in the extent of swarming. Moist soil is needed for depositing the eggs and permitting them to develop. Each female deposits from one to six egg pods, containing 28 to 146 eggs each. The larvae emerge in 15 to 43 days.<\/p>\n<p>In the gregarious phase (from the second stage of metamorphosis onward), the locust is driven by a strong wandering instinct. Masses of them form a random procession of overflowing locust bodies that ignore any obstruction. They swarm over everything (Jl 2:4-9). The only regulator of their activities is temperature; they are immobilized by high or low temperatures. Taking to wing they may move 1,200 miles (1,930.8 kilometers) from their native home. They fly in compact formations large enough to blot out the light of the sun. Their movement seems to be controlled by hormones, but the direction is influenced by the wind. The swarms consume almost every plant in their path, sparing only the carob, sycamore, castor tree, and oleander bush.<\/p>\n<p>A locust plague was one of the most severe evils to come upon the ancient world (Dt 28:38). Joel 2:1-11 describes a locust plague in graphic terms, using it as a symbol of God’s destroying judgment. Special days of prayer, fasting, and trumpet blowing were prescribed to remove locust plagues (1 Kgs 8:37-38; 2 Chr 6:28-29; Jl 2:12-17). Locusts symbolized powerful and merciless enemies that completely destroyed the earnings of human toil (Jgs 6:5; Is 33:4; Jer 46:23; 51:27; Na 3:15).<\/p>\n<p>Bedouins eat locusts raw, roasted, or boiled, preserving them by drying and threading. They are also crushed and ground, and the grist used in cooking or eaten with bread, sometimes mixed with honey and dates. Such was the diet of John the Baptist (Mk 1:6). The Greeks ground locusts in stone mortars to make flour of them.<\/p>\n<p>The ancients considered the two large hind legs, or jumping legs, as separate limbs and had a special name for them. Hence locusts were described as having four legs, a reference to the four smaller walking legs. “Going on all fours” thus referred to creeping or walking as opposed to jumping and did not mean that the unclean insects had only four legs in all. Because of its two hind jumping legs, the locust was exempted from the prohibition against unclean insects (Lv 11:20-23).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mole\">Mole<\/p>\n<p>Rodent <em>(Spalax ehrenbergi)<\/em> from six to nine inches (15 to 23 centimeters) long, which burrows in any area where the soil is suitable for digging; it should be called a mole rat. Common in the Holy Land, large numbers are found in the vicinity of Jerusalem. Isaiah 2:20 refers to the mole, as does Leviticus 11:29-30 (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The mole rat has no tail and is molelike in appearance, but neither true moles nor shrews have ever been found in the Holy Land. The mole rat’s teeth are strong and protruding like those of a squirrel. The neck is short and thick with a plump body shaped like a sausage. The short legs have broad paws with claws adapted for burrowing. The fur is soft, thick, and ashen gray. Its ears and almost sightless eyes, which are no larger than poppyseeds, are hidden in the fur. Folklore taught that touching a mole rat would result in blindness.<\/p>\n<p>In the wet winter season the mole rat builds breeding mounds resembling those of pocket gophers. It builds less complex resting mounds in the summer, although both have rather elaborate tunnel systems. The mole rat feeds on roots, bulbs, tubers, and various other subterranean plant parts, often doing extensive damage to agriculture.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Moth\">Moth<\/p>\n<p>Insect of the genus <em>Tineola<\/em> that lays its eggs on wool or furs, its larvae feeding on those materials. The destructive qualities of moths are referred to in several biblical passages (Jb 13:28; Ps 39:11; Is 50:9; Hos 5:12; Mt 6:19-20; Lk 12:33; Jas 5:2). In Isaiah 51:8 “worm” (<span>nlt<\/span>) refers specifically to the larva of the clothes moth. The moth symbolizes disintegration, decay, and weakening. It is only the larvae that do the damage. The adult is quite harmless and feeds mainly on the nectar of flowers. It is easily crushed (Jb 4:19). The clothes moth reproduces in May or June. It enters human dwellings in the evening. A week after the eggs are laid the larvae appear and immediately begin their work of destruction, eating anything within reach made of animal fibers.<\/p>\n<p>The moth’s destructive activity is done in secret without any sound and without any dramatic appearance, such as a swarm that blots out the sun. In an age when wealth was counted more in possessions than in money, and when among those possessions wool clothing was highly valued, moths could literally cause economic disaster; hence the words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 6:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>There are hundreds of species of moths other than the clothes moth in the Holy Land; they are harmless to leaves, flowers, fruit, trees, and seeds. As with the clothes moth, the larvae inflict the damage.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mouse\">Mouse<\/p>\n<p>Rodent of the family Muridae, especially genus <em>Mus.<\/em> The mouse was regarded as unclean because, being short legged, it was considered one of the creeping creatures (Lv 11:29). Mice known as commensals live in dwellings and tend to have longer tails and to be darker in color than wild mice, which are active chiefly at night. Mice are good climbers and even good swimmers. Wild mice eat many kinds of vegetation, including seeds, fleshy roots, leaves, and stems. At times they store food.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word for “mouse” (Lv 11:29; 1 Sm 6:4-5; Is 66:17) is probably a general term for various rats and mice. The root meaning of the Hebrew word “mouse” is “destruction of corn,” a reference to the damage mice do to field crops. At least 23 varieties of mouselike rodents are known in the Holy Land. They cause food spoilage, damage household articles, and transport the host fleas that spread typhus, spotted fever, and bubonic plague. Plague bacteria may have caused the tumors or swellings among the Philistines (1 Sm 6:5). Isaiah 66:17 refers to a pre-exilic Canaanite cultic practice in which mice were eaten; the reference may actually be to the hamster. A number of rodents are eaten by Arabs of the Near East; the gerbil is considered a special delicacy. <em>See<\/em> Mole (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mule\">Mule<\/p>\n<p>Hybrid offspring of a male ass and a female horse <em>(Equus asinus mulus),<\/em> ordinarily sterile. The offspring of a female donkey and a stallion (male horse) is known as a hinny and is of little value because of its inferior size.<\/p>\n<p>Because crossbreeding was forbidden in the law (Lv 19:19), the Israelites procured mules from the Gentiles, perhaps from the Phoenicians, since Tyre (a Phoenician seaport in what is now southern Lebanon) imported horses and mules (Ez 27:14). Mules did not appear in Israel until David’s reign (2 Sm 13:29), possibly because of the rarity of horses among the Hebrews. Mules were used chiefly by members of the royal court and by other nobles. King David rode on a mule, and Solomon rode to his inaugaration on King David’s mule (1 Kgs 1:33). Absalom met his death riding on a mule (2 Sm 18:9). Mules were less common than horses, camels, and asses in the postexilic community (Ezr 2:66). In antiquity Asia Minor was especially noted for breeding fine mules.<\/p>\n<p>Mules have long enjoyed a reputation for obstinacy, but that trait is not mentioned in the Bible. The mule is prized for riding and for carrying heavy burdens, especially in warm mountainous regions. They are sure-footed and thrive best in hot, dry climates. The mule has the frugality, endurance, and steady gait of an ass along with the size, strength, swiftness, and courage of a horse. Mules are almost never sick. They live longer than horses. They can carry a load of up to 300 pounds (136 kilograms) as far as 30 miles (48.3 kilometers) a day.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Pig\">Pig<\/p>\n<p>Most properly, newborn swine. “Swine” is technically the better name for the species, but it is rarely used in common speech today. The domestic pigs of the Middle East derived from the wild pig <em>(Sus scrofa).<\/em> The pig is the most prolific and abundant supplier of meat and fat for food. A thick layer of fat just under the skin is especially pronounced in domestic breeds. Pigs cannot be driven, so they are of value only to the settled farmer. The Hebrews were originally a nomadic people; therefore, they had little use for an animal closely associated with settled life. An Egyptian prince of about 1500 <span>BC<\/span>, however, is recorded as owning a herd of 1,500 swine.<\/p>\n<p>The pig is clumsily built, yet lively and able to move with agility and speed. The most conspicuous characteristic of the pig is a truncated, mobile snout terminating in a disc-shaped surface on which the nostrils are located. Most pigs have large tusks in both jaws which grow continuously in life. The tusks of the upper jaw are unique in that they curve upward instead of pointing downward as in most animals. The excrement of a pig has an almost unbearable odor, which clings not only to the pig itself but also to swineherds, who can be identified a long way off.<\/p>\n<p>Pigs were never raised in the Holy Land by Jews. The great herd into which Jesus drove the unclean spirits was encountered in the land of the Gadarenes, a non-Jewish area east of the Jordan. The Gadarene demons took refuge in a herd of pigs feeding on a bluff overlooking the Sea of Galilee (Mt 8:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>Wild pigs were found in the Holy Land as in many countries today. Psalm 80:13 refers to the destructiveness of a wild boar (the male, or hog) attacking growing crops. A party of wild boars can destroy an entire vineyard or a field of crops in a single night. They devour, trample, and ravage everything within reach.<\/p>\n<p>Boar hunts were common in ancient Mesopotamia. Wild boars do not attack unless molested, but they are dangerous when aroused. They travel in bands of from 6 to 50 and are most active in the evening and early morning hours. The body is covered with stiff bristles and usually some finer hair, but the body covering is often quite scanty. Wild pigs are mainly vegetarian, feeding on roots, nuts, grains, and plant stems. Wild boars were particularly abundant in the mountainous regions of Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon, in the Jordan River valley, and in wooded sections such as Mt Tabor.<\/p>\n<p>Strict Jews would not even mention swine by name but would always substitute the term “the abomination.” Israelites considered themselves polluted if they were even touched by a swine’s bristle. To the Jews, the pig symbolized filth and ugliness. Pigs will eat fecal material, vermin, rodents, carrion, and the like (2 Pt 2:22). Proverbs 11:22 refers to the incongruity of a golden ring in the nose of an animal showing such characteristics. A similar metaphor occurs in Jesus’ statement about casting pearls before swine (Mt 7:6). The prodigal son’s degeneration was shown by his being forced in his poverty to feed pigs and eat their food (Lk 15:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Eating the flesh of pigs was forbidden to the Jews (Lv 11:7; Dt 14:8). The Canaanites in the Holy Land killed and ate pigs freely. In intertestamental times Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), a Syrian king whose territories included Israel, used the pig to “Hellenize” the Jews. He first tested their loyalty to the Jewish faith by requiring the consumption of pork, considered a delicacy by the Greeks (2 Macc 6:18). The act of desecration that drove the Jews to rebellion, however, was the sprinkling of pig blood on the temple altar in a sacrifice to Zeus (1 Macc 1:47).<\/p>\n<p>Pigs were frequently used in pagan worship (Is 65:4; 66:3, 17), which may account for their being forbidden to the Jews as food. Evidence in the Holy Land shows that pigs were sacrificed long before Hellenistic times. Pig bones were found in a grotto below the rock-cut place of sacrifice at Gezer. A similar underground chamber with vessels containing piglet bones at Tirzah dates to the middle Bronze Age (about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Alabaster fragments of a statuette of a pig ready to be sacrificed have been unearthed. Swine were sacrificed to Aphrodite (Venus) in Greece and Asia Minor. In addition, pigs were sacrificed in connection with oaths and treaties; in the <em>Iliad,<\/em> Agamemnon sacrificed a boar to Zeus and Helios. So it is not surprising that among the Jews the pig became a symbol of filthiness and paganism.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that eating pork was forbidden primarily because the pig may carry many worm parasites such as trichina, though that is also true of some “clean” animals. Another reason for forbidding their consumption may have been that pigs eat carrion. Some people are allergic to pork in hot weather—another suggested reason behind the Jewish taboo. The same taboo exists among the Muslims and existed in certain social strata in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Porcupine\">Porcupine<\/p>\n<p>Rodent, <em>Hystrix cristata,<\/em> which lives in forested areas, rocky hills, ravines, and valleys. The porcupine is still found in the Holy Land today. It has long quills that can be raised to give the appearance of a crest. It is almost entirely nocturnal. It burrows by day into a natural cavity or crevice. The Old World porcupine rarely climbed trees, although the New World porcupine frequently does. A porcupine may weigh as much as 60 pounds (27.2 kilograms). It eats fruit, bark, roots, and other vegetation, and carrion as well. Although its flesh is edible, the porcupine was not classed among the clean animals for the Israelites. The reference in Isaiah 34:11 (<span>rsv<\/span>) is probably to the porcupine, as is Isaiah 14:23 in the <span>nlt<\/span>. <em>See<\/em> Hedgehog.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Scorpion\">Scorpion<\/p>\n<p>Arthropod of the same group as spiders (arachnids). A dozen species of scorpions (order Scorpionida) are found in the Holy Land, but 90 percent of the scorpions are yellow scorpions, usually three to five inches (7.6 to 12.7 centimeters) long. The rock scorpion, also common to the Holy Land, is as thick as a man’s finger and from five to seven inches (12.7 to 17.8 centimeters) in length. Scorpions are slow, nocturnal invertebrates that rest beneath stones by day and prey on insects and other arachnids by night. At the end of its long tail the scorpion carries a poisonous sting that is fatal to most prey and extremely painful to humans (Rv 9:3, 5, 10; cf. 1 Kgs 12:11, 14). Scorpions symbolize Ezekiel’s evil countrymen (Ez 2:6) and the demonic forces of Satan (Lk 10:19). The scorpion is referred to as frequenting the Sinai Desert (Dt 8:15).<\/p>\n<p>A scorpion has from six to eight eyes. It has eight legs like a spider and two lobsterlike claws with which it catches and holds its prey. It feeds particularly on locusts and beetles. In many species the female scorpion eats the male after mating. Scorpions lay eggs that hatch very shortly after laying. Scorpions prefer warmer climates, and because of their desire for warmth, enter houses, especially at night, hiding in beds, blankets, footwear, and clothing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sheep\">Sheep<\/p>\n<p>Domestic animal, <em>Ovis orientalis,<\/em> referred to directly or by some term such as ewe, lamb, ram, or by some fact concerning them over 700 times in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Sheep represented the chief wealth and total livelihood of pastoral peoples, providing food to eat, milk to drink, wool for the making of cloth, and hides and bones for other uses. In addition, the sheep was a medium of exchange and a sacrificial animal. The number of sheep raised in ancient times was prodigious. Mesha, king of Moab, paid a tribute annually of 100,000 lambs and the wool of 100,000 rams (2 Kgs 3:4). The Israelites took 250,000 sheep from the Hagrites (1 Chr 5:21).<\/p>\n<p>Sheep shearing was often done for festivals (2 Sm 13:23). The sheep was held down on its side and its legs were tied together; then it lay docilely while its wool was clipped (Is 53:7). Sheep reserved for burnt offerings were not shorn; nothing could be held back from a sacrifice to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Wool had to be processed before it could be used for clothing. First it was washed, sometimes while still on the sheep, then carded and perhaps weighed for the market. The spinning of wool was regarded as a woman’s work (Prv 31:19), but weaving the spun thread into cloth on a loom was primarily a man’s occupation.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible reports that Abel kept sheep (Gn 4:2). The first sheep to be domesticated was probably the argali <em>(Ovis ammon),<\/em> a variety of the urial <em>(Ovis vignei),<\/em> a mountainous species still existing in Turkestan and Mongolia. Five breeds had reached Mesopotamia by 2000 <span>BC<\/span>; all were of the urial stock.<\/p>\n<p>The sheep known in Israel was the broad-tailed sheep <em>(Ovis orientalis vignei<\/em> or <em>laticaudata),<\/em> of which the tail weighs from 10 to 15 pounds (4.5 to 6.8 kilograms) and has always been considered a delicacy. Thus the Lord asked for this choice part as a sacrifice (Ex 29:22-25).<\/p>\n<p>Only the ram of the broad-tailed sheep has horns, but in other varieties of sheep in the Holy Land the ewe also has horns. The horns, two to three inches (5 to 8 centimeters) in diameter, can be potent weapons. Rams’ horns could be used as trumpets (Jos 6:4) or as oil containers (1 Sm 16:1).<\/p>\n<p>Although the sheep is very similar to the goat, it is differentiated by a lower forehead, its angulated spiral horns marked with transverse wrinkles and curved slightly outward, its covering of wool, and its lack of a “goatee.” Most sheep are white (Ps 147:16; Is 1:18; Dn 7:9; Rv 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>The flesh of sheep was a luxury in the biblical culture. King Solomon required a daily provision of 100 sheep for his table (1 Kgs 4:23), but the common people ate lamb or mutton only on festive occasions. A young ram was usually chosen because the ewes were more important to the future prospects of the herd. The meat was boiled in large caldrons. The milk of the sheep is extremely rich; in biblical times it was usually allowed to curdle before drinking. Possibly some Israelites kept lambs in their houses as pets (2 Sm 12:3-4).<\/p>\n<p>To protect the flock at night against predatory attacks, the shepherd tried to provide a fold. In meadows near villages, folds were built and watchmen were hired to relieve the shepherds. The shepherds of the nativity story were out in the field (Lk 2:8); they had no fold but probably had set up a tent for shelter, consisting simply of goat-hair blankets spread across sapling supports. The scarcity of springs in the Holy Land made the watering of the flock a crucial problem for the shepherd (Gn 13:8-11).<\/p>\n<p>Wild mountain sheep, varieties of <em>Ovis orientalis,<\/em> are known in the Mediterranean area (Dt 14:5). The Deuteronomy passage (<span>kjv<\/span> “chamois”) might also refer to <em>Ovis traelaphus,<\/em> a sheep about five feet high (1.5 meters) with long, curved horns. Another possibility is the Barbary sheep that lives in small flocks in rugged mountain areas in Barbary, Egypt, and Mt Sinai. The true chamois is unknown in Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The sheep is also used figuratively in Scripture. The ram represented great strength and fittingly symbolized Medo-Persia in Daniel’s vision (Dn 8:3). It is the nature of sheep to be gentle and submissive (Is 53:7; Jer 11:19), defenseless (Mi 5:8; Mt 10:16), and in constant need of guidance and care (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36). Such qualities are regarded as desirable in the lives of believers in Christ; hence the many figurative references to sheep in the NT and to Jesus as shepherd (Mk 6:34; Jn 10:1-30; Rom 8:35-37; Heb 13:20-21; 1 Pt 2:25). The resurrected Christ told the apostle Peter to “feed my lambs” and “tend my sheep” (Jn 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Snail\">Snail<\/p>\n<p>Invertebrate gastropods (mollusks). Land snails are very numerous in the Near East. Some freshwater forms serve as hosts for the schistosome worm, the fluke parasite causing the dread disease bilharzia (schistosomiasis).<\/p>\n<p>Purple dyes of all shades were highly valued in the ancient world. A royal purple dye was obtained from secretions of a sea snail <em>(Murex trunculus<\/em> and <em>Murex brandaris).<\/em> Evidently, that process was developed by Phoenicians, Egyptians, and Assyrians as early as 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. The “purple” fishermen had their own guild during the time of the Roman Empire. The snails were harvested during the fall and winter seasons; in the spring, when egg laying took place, little dye was available. The snails tended to remain concealed in the summer. They inhabited the waters off Crete and Phoenicia. Tyrian purple, produced in the Phoenician city of Tyre, the center of the purple-dye industry, was obtained by a double dyeing. Large deposits of murex shells from dyeing operations have been found along the Mediterranean shoreline. The Israelites had to import purple goods (Ez 27:16). Lydia was a “seller of purple” or of cloth so dyed (Acts 16:14). Purple was a sign of distinction, royalty, and wealth (cf. Ex 25:4; 28:5-6, 15; Nm 15:38; 2 Chr 2:7; Est 8:15; Prv 31:22; Sg 3:10; Ez 27:7; Dn 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 30:34-35 refers to “onycha,” which was an important ingredient of incense. Onycha is the horny, clawlike operculum (the plate that closes off the opening of its shell when a snail is retracted) of a Near Eastern member of the molluskan family Strombidae. The operculum is sometimes used for offense or locomotion as well as for defense. When burned, the operculum gives off a sharp, strong scent, and when mixed with more fragrant but less powerful substances is even more potent. The name “onycha” is derived from a Greek word <em>(onyx)<\/em> for a fingernail or a claw.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Snake\">Snake<\/p>\n<p>Various species of snake, suborder Ophidia (Serpentes). In the Bible nine Hebrew words and four Greek ones refer to snakes. The most common Hebrew word is onomatopoeic—that is, it is an imitation of a snake hissing or of the sound it produces as it scrapes its scales along the ground (cf. Jer 46:22). Many types of snakes lay eggs (Is 59:5), although some retain the eggs in the body until ready to hatch.<\/p>\n<p>Snakes are among the most widespread reptiles and are found on all continents except Antarctica; they decrease in numbers and species toward the poles but increase as one approaches the equator. Thirty-three species of snakes are known in Palestine and neighboring countries, 20 of which are poisonous. Two dangerous characteristics of the snake noted by biblical writers are its inconspicuous way of moving and the ease with which it hides itself.<\/p>\n<p>Many snakes are able to swallow animals several times their own diameter because of their unusually flexible jaw mechanism. They lack not only legs but also movable eyelids. Snakes periodically shed their skins. The tongue is actually a hearing apparatus sensitive to airborne vibrations and probably to heat waves.<\/p>\n<p>The venom of poisonous species is a clear, thin secretion, transmitted to the victim’s bloodstream by means of fangs. Two types of venom are known: that of the vipers, which affects respiration and disintegrates red blood cells, and that of the cobras, which paralyzes the nervous system.<\/p>\n<p>The “asp” referred to in the Bible is probably the cobra; the “adder” is the viper. The “cockatrice” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is probably the adder. Serpents were associated with worship in Canaanite religion and symbolized evil deities among many other peoples. Steles (upright stones bearing inscriptions) have been unearthed at several sites in the Holy Land and Syria depicting a god or worshiper with a snake winding about the legs or body. Because the Israelites were burning incense in pagan worship of Moses’ bronze serpent (Nm 21:8-9), King Hezekiah destroyed it in his religious reform (2 Kgs 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Although snakes have been an object of veneration in some religions, in the Judeo-Christian tradition snakes represent evil and, more specifically, the devil. That association began in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:1-15) and is also found in the book of Revelation (12:9; 20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adder (above); Asp (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Spider\">Spider<\/p>\n<p>Animal of the order Araneida. Between 600 and 700 different species inhabit the Holy Land. Spiders are different from insects in that, like scorpions, they have four pairs of legs instead of three. Spiders are equipped with poison glands—the effectiveness varying from species to species. A few can kill only insects, but others can also kill birds and mice.<\/p>\n<p>Most spiders have a pair of spinnerets attached to silk glands on the underside of the abdomen; from them a web is extruded. In the Bible the spider’s web is referred to as a symbol of frailty and insecurity (Jb 8:14; Is 59:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sponge\">Sponge<\/p>\n<p>Simple marine animals, phylum Porifera. The term “sponge” also refers to those animals’ skeletal remains. The sponge has a porous body composed of tubules and cells.<\/p>\n<p>Sponge fishing was well known in the Mediterranean area in ancient times. It was practiced particularly along the Anatolian and Syrian coasts. Sponges were harvested by divers. The use of sponges in absorbing liquids is referred to in the Bible (Mt 27:48; Mk 15:36).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Unicorn\">Unicorn<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Wild Ox (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wasp\">Wasp<\/p>\n<p>Insects of the family Vespidae. Hornets are social wasps that build large aerial apartment houses in which 1,000 or more individuals may live. In the Bible the hornet is used as a metaphor for God’s use of military forces (Ex 23:28; Dt 7:20; Jos 24:12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Whale\">Whale<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all living creatures, including those that have become extinct. Whales are air-breathing mammals of the order Cetacea.<\/p>\n<p>Two varieties of whales visit the shores of the Holy Land at times. The finback whale <em>(Balaenoptera physalus)<\/em> weighs about 200 tons (181 metric tons) and lives mainly in the Arctic region but sometimes passes through the Straits of Gibraltar to reach the eastern Mediterranean Sea. It feeds on small marine organisms that it strains through its whale bone; it does not have teeth. The finback whale’s esophagus is narrow.<\/p>\n<p>The sperm whale <em>(Physeter catodon),<\/em> about 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, has a curiously shaped head that looks like a battering ram. The teeth in the lower jaw of the male sperm whale are about seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long. It feeds on big fish, even on sharks. It has a large throat opening.<\/p>\n<p>Whales are referred to in Genesis 1:21 and Job 7:12 (<span>kjv<\/span> only). The “great fish” of Jonah 2:1 need not have been a whale but could have been a large shark, such as the whale shark <em>(Rhineodon),<\/em> which grows 70 feet (21.3 meters) long and lacks the terrible teeth of other sharks. Whatever the actual marine organism, Jonah’s deliverance was miraculous. The Greek word for “whale” is sometimes used as a general term for “sea monster” or huge fish and may be used in that sense in Matthew 12:40.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WildOx\">Wild Ox<\/p>\n<p>Large, fierce, fleet, intractable animal <em>(Bos primigenius).<\/em> It had a long, lean rump with a straight back and a long, narrow head. The animal described in Job 39:9-12 is clearly the wild ox. The two horns (Dt 33:17), its outstanding characteristic, were straight and as long as the head (Nm 23:22; 24:8; Ps 22:21). Kings often symbolized their dominion by wearing a helmet with two wild ox horns (cf. Pss 92:10; 132:17-18). The horns were often used as drinking vessels by the Israelites; some were large enough to hold four gallons (15 liters).<\/p>\n<p>Hunting the wild ox was a favorite sport of Assyrian kings. Tiglath-pileser I hunted it in the Lebanon Mountains about 1100 <span>BC<\/span> (cf. Ps 29:6). At one time the animal referred to in Job 39:9-12 was thought to be the oryx or antelope because of the similarity between the Hebrew word in Job and the Arabian name for oryx. The translators of the <span>kjv<\/span> called the wild ox a “unicorn” because of representations found on Babylonian mosaics and Egyptian drawings. Those representations showed it in strict profile, showing only one horn—hence, “unicorn.” Jerome’s Vulgate, a Latin Bible translation (fourth century <span>AD<\/span>) and Martin Luther’s German version translated it similarly.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wolf\">Wolf<\/p>\n<p>Large doglike mammal <em>(Canis lupus)<\/em> that travels in bands of up to 30 animals. From the nose to the rump, the wolf measures about 3 feet (.9 meter); its drooping tail is about 18 inches (.5 meter) long. It looks much like a skinny German shepherd dog. The grayish yellow pelt is coarse and short haired.<\/p>\n<p>Wolves hunt singly or in relays, usually at night (Jer 5:6). Wolves have acute hearing and sight but rely chiefly on scent and usually catch their prey in a swift, open chase. The wolf has a reputation for boldness, fierceness, and voracity (Gn 49:27; Hb 1:8). It commonly kills more than it can eat or drag away and thus is known for its greediness.<\/p>\n<p>The wolf is a restless animal, always on the move; hunger drives it from one place to another in constant search of new hunting grounds. During spring and fall, wolves usually roam singly or in pairs, whereas in summer they may travel in family groups. In winter, several such groups may join to form a large pack. Wolves are intelligent, social creatures, faithful to their own kind. They mate for life. Individually, the wolf is a rather timid animal; it would much rather avoid human beings. But collectively wolves can be among the most dangerous animals alive.<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt, Rome, and Greece the wolf was considered sacred. Wolves were well known in the Holy Land and are still found there and also in many places in Asia Minor. Shepherds continually battled with wolves that plundered their flocks (Jn 10:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible refers to wolves in a literal sense in only three places (Is 11:6; 65:25; Jn 10:12), all other references being figurative. Usually the wolf is a symbol of enemies or the wicked (e.g., Ez 22:27; Zep 3:3; Acts 20:29). Both the wolf’s courage and its cruelty were probably in the mind of the patriarch Jacob when he predicted the fate of Benjamin’s tribe (Gn 49:27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Worm\">Worm<\/p>\n<p>Actually insect larvae in most biblical references, usually maggots, the larvae of flies (see Fly, above). For example, maggots are evidently referred to in accounts of worms feeding on spoiled manna (Ex 16:19-20), corpses (Jb 21:26; Is 14:11), or open wounds (Jb 7:5). Mark 9:48 refers to a maggot that eats dead flesh. In Acts 12:23 a fatal, worm-induced abdominal disease of King Herod is mentioned. In other cases, the reference is to the larvae of other insects (Is 51:8). In Deuteronomy 28:39 and Jonah 4:7 the vine weevil <em>(Cochylis ambiguella)<\/em> is probably referred to; it destroys vines by boring into their stems. Comparing a man to a worm is a metaphor for abasement (Jb 25:6; Ps 22:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANIMALS<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals as object lessons.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical approach to classification of animals is somewhat different from the system of classification used by biologists today. The present system of classification, which traces back to Carolus Linnaeus (an 18th-century Swedish botanist), is based on structure, both internal and external. The biblical basis of classification is habitat. Thus Genesis 1 speaks of aquatic organisms (v 20); aerial organisms (v 21); animals that crawl on the ground (v 24); cattle or domesticated animals (animals that live in association with humans) (v 24); and wild animals (v 24). The same system of classification is followed in Leviticus 11 and throughout Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Because of the divergence between systems of classification, the various animals of the Bible will be listed here in alphabetical order—including reptiles, fish, and even invertebrates such as insects, spiders, worms, and sponges. Birds are discussed in a separate article.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Adder<\/p>\n<p>• Ant<\/p>\n<p>• Antelope<\/p>\n<p>• Ape<\/p>\n<p>• Asp<\/p>\n<p>• Ass<\/p>\n<p>• Badger<\/p>\n<p>• Bat<\/p>\n<p>• Bear<\/p>\n<p>• Bee<\/p>\n<p>• Behemoth<\/p>\n<p>• Camel<\/p>\n<p>• Caterpillar<\/p>\n<p>• Cattle<\/p>\n<p>• Chameleon<\/p>\n<p>• Coral<\/p>\n<p>• Cricket<\/p>\n<p>• Crocodile<\/p>\n<p>• Deer<\/p>\n<p>• Dog<\/p>\n<p>• Donkey<\/p>\n<p>• Dragon<\/p>\n<p>• Fish<\/p>\n<p>• Flea<\/p>\n<p>• Fly<\/p>\n<p>• Fox<\/p>\n<p>• Frog<\/p>\n<p>• Gazelle<\/p>\n<p>• Gecko<\/p>\n<p>• Gnat<\/p>\n<p>• Goat<\/p>\n<p>• Grasshopper<\/p>\n<p>• Hare<\/p>\n<p>• Hippopotamus<\/p>\n<p>• Horse<\/p>\n<p>• Hyena<\/p>\n<p>• Jackal<\/p>\n<p>• Leech<\/p>\n<p>• Leopard<\/p>\n<p>• Leviathan<\/p>\n<p>• Lion<\/p>\n<p>• Lizard<\/p>\n<p>• Locust<\/p>\n<p>• Mole<\/p>\n<p>• Moth<\/p>\n<p>• Mouse<\/p>\n<p>• Mule<\/p>\n<p>• Pig<\/p>\n<p>• Porcupine<\/p>\n<p>• Scorpion<\/p>\n<p>• Sheep<\/p>\n<p>• Snail<\/p>\n<p>• Snake<\/p>\n<p>• Spider<\/p>\n<p>• Sponge<\/p>\n<p>• Unicorn<\/p>\n<p>• Wasp<\/p>\n<p>• Whale<\/p>\n<p>• Wild Ox<\/p>\n<p>• Wolf<\/p>\n<p>• Worm<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Adder\">Adder<\/p>\n<p>One of the 20 poisonous snakes found in Israel and surrounding countries, also referred to as cockatrice and viper. True vipers (genus <em>Cerastes, Echis colorata,<\/em> and <em>Vipera palestina<\/em>) also exist there, poisonous snakes with curved fangs that spring into position when the snake strikes. The horned viper <em>(Cerastes hasselquistii)<\/em> may attack horses. It is 12 to 18 inches (30 to 46 centimeters) long and often lies in ambush in the sand with only its eyes and the hornlike protrusions on its head visible.<\/p>\n<p>Both Jesus and John the Baptist referred to the viper several times (Mt 3:7; 12:34; 23:33). The reference in Acts 28:3 is probably to a small viper <em>(Vipera aspis)<\/em> that strikes rapidly and is very pugnacious. It is found in southern Europe and hisses each time it inhales and exhales. The poison of vipers attacks the respiratory system and disintegrates red blood cells.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ant\">Ant<\/p>\n<p>Mentioned only twice in the Bible, both times in the book of Proverbs. For many years Solomon was charged with a biological error when he referred to the ant as providing her meat in the summer and gathering her food in the harvest (Prv 6:8). Critics of the Bible were quick to point out that, so far as was then known, ants do not store up food. They assumed that Solomon had probably kicked open an ant hill and mistaken the pupal cases (pods in which immature ants grow to maturity) for grain or had observed ants carrying bits of grain, leaves, and other matter to their nests.<\/p>\n<p>At least three species of grain-storing ants are now known—two occur in Israel and the other in Mediterranean countries. The particular species referred to by Solomon (Prv 6:6-8; 30:24-25) is probably the harvester ant <em>(Messor semirufus).<\/em> Its granaries are flat chambers connected by galleries irregularly scattered over an area about six feet (1.8 meters) in diameter and about a foot (.3 meter) deep in the ground. Seeds are collected from the ground or picked from plants. The head, or radicle, which is the softest part of the kernel, is bitten off to prevent germination, and the chaff and empty capsules are discarded on kitchen middens (refuse piles) outside the nest. Individual granaries may be 5 inches (12.7 centimeters) in diameter and a half inch (1.2 centimeters) high. Some nests are known to be 40 feet (12 meters) in diameter and 6 to 7 feet (approx. 2 meters) deep with several entrances.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Antelope\">Antelope<\/p>\n<p>Several antelope-like creatures are referred to in the Scriptures. One seems to be the white oryx <em>(Oryx leucoryx),<\/em> referred to in Deuteronomy 14:5 (<span>kjv<\/span> “wild ox”; <span>rsv<\/span> “antelope”) and Isaiah 51:20 (<span>kjv<\/span> “wild bull”; <span>RSV <\/span>“antelope”). The oryx was probably the antelope, commonly used for food because its long horns made it relatively easy to catch.<\/p>\n<p>Another antelope mentioned in the Bible is the addax <em>(Addax nasomaculatus),<\/em> probably the “pygarg” of Deuteronomy 14:5 (<span>kjv<\/span>). It is a native of North Africa with grayish white hinder parts, a white patch on the forehead, and twisted and ringed horns. The word “pygarg” comes from a Greek word meaning “white rump.” The addax is about the size of a donkey. Its body is closely covered with short hair. It has a short mane on the underside of its neck that makes the head look somewhat like that of a goat. The hooves are broad and flat, and the tail resembles that of a donkey. It is common in Africa and in Arabia, where Arabs hunt it with falcons and dogs.<\/p>\n<p>Antelopes are very graceful and run with their heads held high. Both sexes have long, permanent, hollow horns. With the oryx the horns go straight back; addax horns are twisted and ringed. Antelope are alert, wary, and keen sighted. They are usually found in herds of from two to a dozen. If injured or brought to bay, an antelope attacks with its head lowered so that the sharp horns point forward. Antelopes feed on grasses and shrubs, drinking from streams and water holes. When water is scarce, they eat melons and succulent bulbs. Both addax and oryx were ceremonially clean in Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ape\">Ape<\/p>\n<p>Primate not native to Palestine. The two references to apes in the OT (1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21) refer to their importation by King Solomon with other treasures on board the ships of his mercantile fleet. There is some question concerning the origin of those primates. Some believe that the mention of “ivory” in the same verses suggests they came from East Africa and that they were indeed apes, that is, tailless primates. Others, believing they came from India or Ceylon, suggest that they were actually monkeys. There the baboon (genus Papeio), a large monkey, was considered sacred to the god Thoth. Males of that genus were kept in temples, and the more docile females were often kept as house pets. Such baboons frequently had some of their teeth removed or ground down to lessen the danger of their biting. A number of mummified baboons have been found in Egypt, indicating the high regard in which they were held.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Asp\">Asp<\/p>\n<p>Poisonous snake. Most biblical references to the asp (Dt 32:33) seem to be to the Egyptian cobra <em>(Naja haje),<\/em> which conceals itself in holes, walls, and rocks and has the ability to expand its neck by raising its anterior ribs so as to enlarge the front of its breast into the shape of a flat disc. Its potent poison can cause death in 30 minutes. It attains a length of about 80 inches (2 meters). The fangs are permanently erect, not movable as in the vipers (the common poisonous snakes of North America; only the coral snake in America has permanently erect fangs). Cobra poison attacks the nervous system, causing muscular paralysis. The Egyptians looked upon it as a sacred creature; they regarded it as a protector since it fed on the rodents that ate their crops. The “fiery serpents” (Nm 21:6; Dt 8:15, both <span>rsv<\/span>) may have been cobras; “fiery” probably refers to the burning fever caused by their venom. Isaiah 14:29 and 30:6 (“flying serpent”) may refer to the hood of the cobra.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ass\">Ass<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Donkey (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Badger\">Badger<\/p>\n<p>Small hoofed mammal. What the <span>kjv<\/span> calls a “coney,” modern translations name “rock badger” (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7; Ps 104:18; Prv 30:26). The rock badger spoken of in the Bible is probably the Syrian rock hyrax <em>(Hyrax syriaca),<\/em> the only species of hyrax found outside Africa. This small ungulate (having hooflike toenails) lives among rocks from the Dead Sea valley to Mt Hermon. It is strictly a herbivorous (plant-eating) animal about the size of a rabbit. It resembles a guinea pig more than a rabbit, having quite inconspicuous ears and a very small tail. It has broad nails with four toes on its forelegs and three on its hind legs, the toes being connected with skin almost like a web. Pads acting as sucking discs under its feet enable it to keep its footing on slippery rocks. With its yellow and brown fur, it is sometimes called the bear rat because of its resemblance to a tailless rat. It is also equipped with black whiskers that may be seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p>These rock badgers, or hyraxes, live together in colonies of from 6 to 50 animals, often sunning themselves on rocks. They are difficult to catch. Guards are posted, and if approaching danger is sighted, the whole group will scurry for cover, warned by the sharp whistles of the guards. Thus they are commended for taking refuge in the rocks (Ps 104:18) and are called wise for making “their houses in the rocks” (Prv 30:24, 26, <span>kjv<\/span>). The badger is not a ruminant (does not chew its cud), but the motion of its jaws may suggest that it chews its cud. That is probably why it was included with other cud-chewing animals in the Jewish food laws (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7). It was forbidden to the Jews as food because it did not have cloven hooves. Some Arabs eat and even prize its meat.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bat\">Bat<\/p>\n<p>Flying mammals according to modern classification. They have hair and provide milk for their young. The Bible classifies them with other aerial creatures. Bats take shelter in caves, crevices, tree cavities, buildings, and also in exposed places on trees. In colder areas they hibernate or migrate. The normal resting position for a bat is hanging head downward. Bats “swim” through the air rather than fly because they move with their legs as well as with their wings.<\/p>\n<p>The bat’s thumb is free and terminates in a single hook claw used for climbing and hanging. The hind feet have five toes, all pointing the same way. The large chest accommodates the powerful muscles needed for flying. Because they orient themselves by echo location, the sense of hearing is very well developed.<\/p>\n<p>Most bats are insect eaters, seizing insects in flight. Many insectivorous bats also eat some fruit. Other bats feed exclusively, usually in groups, on fruit and green vegetation. Fruit-eating bats generally live in the tropics where fruit is constantly ripening, although some have been found in the Holy Land. These bats tend to be larger than the insectivores, having a wingspread of up to five feet (1.5 meters).<\/p>\n<p>A third group includes flower-eating bats that feed on pollen and nectar. These small bats with long pointed heads and long tongues are found only in tropical and semitropical regions. Three species of vampire bats, which do not occur in the Holy Land, eat blood by making a small incision and lapping it up. Carnivorous (meat-eating) bats prey on birds, lizards, and frogs. Fish-eating bats catch fish at or near the water surface.<\/p>\n<p>Eight varieties of bats are known in the Holy Land. One of them, the little brown bat (genus <em>Myotis<\/em>), is worldwide in its distribution. It is insectivorous and probably has the widest distribution of any nonhuman terrestrial mammal. Brown bats are mostly cave dwellers. The females form maternity colonies that may number in the tens of thousands.<\/p>\n<p>Two species of mouse-tailed bats (genus <em>Rhinopoma<\/em>) are found in the Holy Land. Their tails are nearly as long as the head and body combined. They are colonial, roosting in caves, rock clefts, wells, pyramids, palaces, and houses. Like the brown bat, they are insectivorous. The slit-faced or hollow-faced bats (genus <em>Nycteris<\/em>) are also found in the Holy Land. They are insectivorous and roost in groups from 6 to 20.<\/p>\n<p>The bats found in the Holy Land vary in size from that of a mouse to the size of a rat; the largest species measures more than 20 inches (51 centimeters) across the wings. The bat was unclean to the Jews (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bear\">Bear<\/p>\n<p>Large, heavy, big-headed mammal with short, powerful limbs, a short tail, and small eyes and ears. Bears have a “plantigrade” walk: they walk on both the sole and heel as humans do. The Palestinian bear is a Syrian version of the brown bear <em>(Ursus arctos syriacus).<\/em> It can grow to a height of 6 feet (1.8 meters) and may weigh as much as 500 pounds (227 kilograms).<\/p>\n<p>Bears have an excellent sense of smell but less developed senses of sight and hearing. They are omnivorous (eating any kind of food); they subsist largely on vegetation, fruits, insects, and fish.<\/p>\n<p>Bears are usually peaceful and inoffensive, but if they think they must defend themselves (Lam 3:10) or their young (2 Sm 17:8; Prv 17:12; Hos 13:8), they may be formidable and dangerous adversaries. David boasted of his role as a bear killer (1 Sm 17:34-37). Since a blow from a bear’s paw can be fatal, David’s courage and strength as a young shepherd in running after a bear and wrenching one of his father’s sheep from its jaws were noteworthy.<\/p>\n<p>Some biblical passages seem to imply that bears attacked for no apparent reason (e.g., Prv 28:15; Am 5:19). At other times they were God’s instruments of punishment, as in the story of Elisha and the two she-bears (2 Kgs 2:24). The bear and the lion, often mentioned together in the Bible (1 Sm 17:37), were the two largest and strongest beasts of prey in the Holy Land. Thus they symbolized both strength and terror (Am 5:19).<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times bears seem to have roamed all over Palestine. Today they are found only in the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains, and even there they are rare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bee\">Bee<\/p>\n<p>One of two domesticated insects <em>(Apis mellifica),<\/em> the other being the silkworm. Bees gather nectar from flowers, transferring pollen from one flower to another in the process. It is believed that they convey the location of sources of nectar to other bees through a bee “dance,” which may indicate both distance and direction. Bees are sensitive to four colors: blue-green, yellow-green, blue-violet, and ultra-violet (invisible to humans).<\/p>\n<p>The wild bees of the Holy Land are especially noted for their ferocity in attack. Only the female “worker” bees sting people and animals, the virulence of their venom increasing in warm weather. A number of biblical passages allude to the irritable, vindictive nature of bees and to the painful stings they inflict (Dt 1:44; Ps 118:12; Is 7:18).<\/p>\n<p>One reference calls attention to the fact that in semidesert regions a dead animal’s carcass, stripped to the bone by jackals or vultures and dried in the sun, can provide wild bees an excellent place to start a new colony (Jgs 14:5-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians considered the bee sacred. In ancient Greece candles were made from beeswax. In the Holy Land, beekeeping was probably not practiced until the Hellenistic period (second century <span>BC<\/span>), although Ezekiel 27:17 suggests that it may have been practiced earlier. If domestic honey was not available to the Hebrews, wild honey certainly was, and travelers would be on the lookout for caches of honey in rocky clefts and other likely places. The Philistines and the Hittites practiced beekeeping in their cities.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible contains many references to bees and bee products. A bee swarm was a valuable asset, though the price of honey itself was low. Honey was sometimes eaten with the honeycomb (Sg 5:1). Honey also had uses other than food, e.g., in embalming.<\/p>\n<p>The land of Israel was described as a land flowing with milk and honey. Honey was a major source of sweetening in the ancient Near East—hence, its importance (cf. Jgs 14:8-9). Actually the Hebrew word for “honey” may include not only bee honey but also the sweet syrup extracted from such fruits as figs, dates, and grapes. Thus “a land flowing with milk and honey” (Ex 3:8, <span>rsv<\/span>) does not necessarily stand for a land of bees but for a land rich in sweetness.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Honey.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Behemoth\">Behemoth<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Hippopotamus (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Camel\">Camel<\/p>\n<p>Large beast of burden. Unintelligent, ill-natured, and quarrelsome, the camel <em>(Camelus dromedarius)<\/em> is nevertheless a blessing to people living in the desert and on its borders because it is especially adapted to that habitat. It has been called the ship of the desert. Having thick elastic pads of fibrous tissue on its feet, it can walk on hot desert sands. It can go without water for long periods and can subsist on vegetation growing on the saline soils. The camel’s nostrils are pinched together and can be closed at will to prevent penetration of sand during violent sandstorms.<\/p>\n<p>Camels are used for transporting both goods and people. A person riding a camel can cover from 60 to 75 miles (96.5 to 121 kilometers) in a day. A camel can carry a load weighing 600 pounds (272 kilograms) or more. Camels were used heavily in the spice trade (Gn 37:25) and traveled regularly in camel trains between Arabia, Egypt, and Assyria. They were also ridden in time of war (Jgs 6:5). A camel can even be hitched to a plow in areas where the land is cultivated.<\/p>\n<p>The hair shed by camels during the early spring is preserved and used in weaving cloth and making tents. As much as 10 pounds (4.5 kilograms) of hair can be obtained from one camel. A rough cloak of camel’s hair, as worn by John the Baptist (Mt 3:4), is still worn by Bedouins today. A camel’s hair garment was also the sign of the prophetic office (Zec 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>Two varieties of camel occur within the one-humped species, the slow burden-bearing camel referred to in Genesis 37:25 and the fast dromedary of 1 Samuel 30:17. The dromedary can stand seven feet (2.1 meters) tall and measure as much as nine feet (2.7 meters) from the muzzle to the tip of the tail. With its three-chambered stomach, which can hold from 15 to 30 quarts (14.2 to 28.4 liters) of liquid, it can go for as long as 5 days during the summer or 25 days in winter without drinking. The camel’s hump is a reserve store of fat, making it possible for the animal to subsist on very little food during a desert journey.<\/p>\n<p>Another species of camel, the Bactrian camel <em>(Camelus bactrianus),<\/em> is also resident in the Holy Land. It has two humps. It is heavier, bigger, and has longer hair than the one-humped camel and is slower than the swift dromedary. Isaiah 21:7 may refer to the Bactrian camel; both kinds of camel are referred to in Esther 8:10 (<span>kjv<\/span>). Camels ranked in importance with sheep, cattle, and asses in OT times. A third of the 66 biblical references to the camel lists it with other animals.<\/p>\n<p>Camels are ruminants (cud-chewing mammals) but do not have cloven hooves. Thus, they were included in the list of unclean beasts, forbidden by the Israelites as food (Lv 11:4; Dt 14:7). They are eaten by Arabs, however, who also drink their milk (cf. Gn 32:15).<\/p>\n<p>Abraham had camels in Egypt (Gn 12:16). At first Job had 3,000 camels (Jb 1:3) and after his recovery, 6,000 (Jb 42:12). Although wide use of camels does not seem to have begun until shortly before 1000 <span>BC<\/span> (Jgs 6:5), Sumerian texts from the Old Babylonian period list camels and indicate that they had been domesticated. Camel bones and figurines have been found at various eastern archaeological sites dating from well before 1200 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Caterpillar\">Caterpillar<\/p>\n<p>Larval stage of insects characterized by complete metamorphosis. Such insects pass through four stages: egg, larva or caterpillar, pupa, and adult. Bees, flies, moths, and butterflies all pass through a larval or caterpillar stage.<\/p>\n<p>The word “caterpillar” occurs three times in the <span>nlt<\/span> (1 Kgs 8:37; 2 Chr 6:28; Ps 78:46). In the book of Joel that same Hebrew word is translated “locust” (1:4; 2:25, <span>nlt<\/span>). The locust and grasshopper to which the Hebrew word refers have an incomplete type of metamorphosis with only three stages: egg, nymph, and adult. The nymph is a miniature adult in which the wings are not fully developed, though their outline may be present. There are several nymph stages known as instars. The reference is to one of the last instars, in which the wing structures are still folded together and enclosed in a sac but are nevertheless clearly recognizable. That form of the insect is about an inch (2.5 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cattle\">Cattle<\/p>\n<p>Domestic animals of the bovine species <em>(Bos primigenius).<\/em> The OT often emphasized the beauty of cattle. Egypt was rich in cattle, especially in the Nile River delta area (Goshen), where the Hebrews settled under Joseph.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars believe that milk rather than meat was the foremost consideration in the domestication of cattle and that in early civilizations meat supplies came chiefly from wild game. Cattle also supplied strong hides that supplanted wood in the manufacture of shields. Their dung was a source of fuel when wood was scarce (Ez 4:15). They were used as beasts of burden and for plowing. Development of wheeled transportation was associated more closely with cattle than with any other animal.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical term “cattle” often refers to all domesticated animals or livestock (Gn 1:24; 2:20; 7:23; 47:6, 16-17; Ex 9:3-7; Nm 3:41, 45). Occasionally, the term was used to refer to all large domestic animals (Nm 31:9; 32:26), although sometimes the word as used in the <span>kjv<\/span> refers only to sheep and goats (Gn 30:32, 39, 43; 31:8, 10; Is 7:25; 43:23).<\/p>\n<p>Probably several kinds of cattle were domesticated in the Holy Land. Small, short-legged, black or brown shorthorn cattle were found in the southern part of Judah; that type submitted easily to the yoke and was prominent in agricultural operations. Along the coast a larger variety was found, and the wild districts east of the Jordan River were populated with a breed of huge black cattle.<\/p>\n<p>Cattle breeding was widely practiced by the patriarchs (cf. Gn 32:15; Jb 21:10). Strict laws in Mesopotamia, as well as in Israel, penalized the owner of a bull that gored a man or other cattle (Ex 21:28-36). Bulls were sometimes employed figuratively as pictures of strength or violence (Dt 33:17; Pss 22:12; 68:30; Is 10:13). For breeding purposes one bull is normally adequate for about 30 cows, but many more were kept since bulls were widely used in Israel for sacrifices. They might be used as a general sacrifice (Lv 22:23; Nm 23:1) or for special sacrifices (Jgs 6:25; 1 Sm 1:24). Particular sacrifices were offered at the consecration of priests (Ex 29:1), consecration of an altar (Nm 7), purification of the Levites (Nm 8), sin offerings (Lv 16), day of the new moon (Nm 28:11-14), Passover (Nm 28:19), Feast of Weeks (Nm 28:27), Feast of Trumpets (Nm 29:1-2), Day of Atonement (Nm 29:7-9), and the Feast of Tabernacles (Nm 29:12-38). The Feast of Tabernacles required the largest number of bulls for burnt offerings of all the annual feasts, with a total of 71 being slaughtered during the course of eight days.<\/p>\n<p>Calves were sometimes referred to as “sons of the herd” in the original Hebrew (Gn 18:8; 1 Sm 6:7; 14:32). The calf, a symbol of peacefulness (Is 11:6), was also used figuratively to refer to the weak (Ps 68:30). A calf’s head decorated the back of Solomon’s throne (1 Kgs 10:19). Calves were sometimes fattened in stalls to keep them from running off weight in the field (Am 6:4; Mal 4:2; Lk 15:23) or were kept around the house; the witch of Endor kept a calf in her house that she killed and served to Saul and his men (1 Sm 28:24-25). Calves supplied veal (Gn 18:7), considered a delicacy by the wealthy; Amos referred to stall-fattened calves in a denunciation of luxurious and careless living (Am 6:4). Calves also supplied meat for all Saul’s armies at the great slaughter of the Philistines (1 Sm 14:32). The “fatted calf” served roasted or boiled was gourmet fare, suitable for the finest banquet (Gn 18:7; Mt 22:4; Lk 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Cattle were subject to the law of firstlings (Ex 13:12). They were a mark of wealth (Gn 13:2) and were considered proper booty of war (Jos 8:2). Aaron, the first high priest, made a golden calf as a rival to the ark of the covenant (Ex 32; Dt 9:16, 21). Even though he represented the calf as an image of the invisible God, it was especially offensive because the calf was a fertility symbol related to Egyptian and Canaanite practices. Two calves were later made by Jeroboam I of Israel (930–909 <span>BC<\/span>) for his shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:28-33). Hosea’s prophetic denunciations of calf worship were directed at those shrines (Hos 8:5-6; 13:2).<\/p>\n<p>An ox is an adult castrated bull. A steer is a young ox. Oxen were used to do work (Nm 7:3; Dt 22:10; 25:4), though for moving heavy objects, cows were typically favored over bulls because of their more docile nature. Oxen were also used as pack animals (1 Chr 12:40, although they did not have the endurance of the ass, camel, or mule. They usually fed on grass (Nm 22:4; Ps 106:20), but they also ate straw (Is 11:7) and salted fodder (Is 30:24) and could be kept in a stable (Lk 13:15). Oxen could not be offered as sacrifices because they had been castrated (Lv 22:24). They could be used for food but were rarely eaten. Possession of an ox and an ass was regarded as the bare minimum for existence in the ancient Palestinian agriculture economy (Jb 24:3; cf. Ex 20:17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Agriculture; Food and Food Preparation; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Chameleon\">Chameleon<\/p>\n<p>Lizard characterized by its ability to change color according to its surroundings <em>(Chameleon vulgaris).<\/em> To the Israelites the chameleon was ritually unclean (Lv 11:30). The Hebrew word for chameleon is derived from a word meaning “to pant.” A lizard’s lungs are very large, and in ancient times lizards were believed to live on air. A chameleon’s eyes move independently of each other; so at times one eye may be turned upward and the other downward. Chameleons live in trees and bushes, clinging to branches with their long tails.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Coral\">Coral<\/p>\n<p>Calcareous (lime-containing) skeletons of relatively simple marine organisms <em>(Corallium rubrum).<\/em> Red coral from the Mediterranean and Red Seas is widely used for jewelry and for medicinal purposes. While the animal is alive, the coral is green in color and shrublike in appearance, looking rather like an underwater plant since the coral animals are immobil. When the coral is removed from the water, it becomes hard and red in color.<\/p>\n<p>In ancient times coral was sometimes used as money, along with precious stones, pearls, and gold. Some believe the biblical reference in Lamentations 4:7 (<span>rsv<\/span>) is to pearls rather than to coral, but it is probable that the references in Job 28:18 and Ezekiel 27:16 are to the red coral (see <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cricket\">Cricket<\/p>\n<p>Insect of the order Orthptera related to grasshoppers and locusts. According to Leviticus 11:22, the cricket was edible. The reference may be to one of the growth stages of the locust.<\/p>\n<p>The <span>kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word as “beetle.” Beetles are insects with chewing mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the fore pair being hard and sheathlike and the hind pair being membranous and folded under the fore pair. Some beetles are carnivorous, others are chiefly herbivorous. Some are aquatic, some produce a secretion that blisters the skin, some damage fabrics, some damage crops, and some feed on other insects that are harmful to humans. In ancient Egypt the beetle, or sacred scarab, was a symbol of the sun god Ra. Scarab seals and amulets were extremely popular in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Crocodile\">Crocodile<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all existing reptiles <em>(Crocodilus vulgaris),<\/em> attaining a length of well over 20 feet (6 meters). Crocodiles are characterized by large lizardlike bodies supported by short legs. The head terminates in a flattened snout armed with strong conical teeth, each of which is implanted in a distinct socket. New teeth growing from beneath continually replace those in use. The toes are webbed. The back and tail are protected by quadrangular horny shields of varying sizes arranged in regular rows and in contact with one another at the edges. The eyes are covered with movable lids that can be closed when the animal enters the water.<\/p>\n<p>The crocodile spends most of its time in the water where it feeds mainly on fish but also on aquatic birds and even small animals that come down to the water’s edge to drink. It is surprisingly fast and agile on dry land, even though its legs are so short that its belly and tail drag across the earth leaving a distinct path.<\/p>\n<p>Until the beginning of the 20th century, the crocodile was found in the marshes and small coastal rivers of western Palestine. A first-century Roman writer, Pliny, referred to a place in the Holy Land called Crocodeilopolis (“crocodile city”) to the south of Mt Carmel, and visitors to the Holy Land as late as the 19th century reported seeing crocodiles in that general region.<\/p>\n<p>The description of “Leviathan” in Job 41 seems to be based on the crocodile (thus the translation of the <span>nlt<\/span>). The “dragon” of Ezekiel 29:3, used figuratively of the Egyptian pharaoh, may be a reference to the crocodile.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Deer\">Deer<\/p>\n<p>Large ruminant (cud-chewing) animals. Only the males have antlers (branching horns). Deer antlers grow annually and are solid, in contrast to those of the antelope and the gazelle. Fully developed antlers are devoid of any covering of skin or horn and, for all practical purposes, may be regarded as a mass of dead bone carried for a certain time by the living animal.<\/p>\n<p>The end of the deer’s muzzle is naked in all species. The stomach is divided into a series of compartments, some of which are used to store partly chewed food. The food is later regurgitated, rechewed, and finally swallowed into a section of the stomach where true digestion takes place.<\/p>\n<p>Three species of deer were known in Palestine: the red deer <em>(Cervus elaphus),<\/em> the Persian fallow deer <em>(Dama mesopotamica),<\/em> and the roe deer <em>(Capreolus capreolus).<\/em> All are now extinct there. The last deer were hunted in the Holy Land in 1914. The red deer referred to in the Bible as “hart” (male), “stag” (male), or “hind” (female) stood about four feet (1.2 meters) high at the shoulder. It was gregarious (living in herds or flocks), each group remaining in a definite territory. Red deer grazed and browsed during the morning and late afternoon (Lam 1:6). The sexes remained in separate herds. The red deer was known for its leaping (Is 35:6) and sure-footedness in the mountains (Ps 18:33; Sg 2:8-9, 17; 8:14; Hb 3:19).<\/p>\n<p>The antlers of the Persian fallow deer (1 Kgs 4:23) were large, flattened, and palmated (shaped like an open palm with fingers extended), and its coat was a yellowbrown. It traveled in small groups, feeding mainly on grass in the morning and evening.<\/p>\n<p>The roe deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23) was a small, graceful animal, dark reddish brown in summer and yellowish gray in winter. Its antlers were about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long and had three points. The roe deer preferred sparsely wooded valleys and the lower slopes of mountains, grazing in open grasslands. It usually associated in family groups made up of the doe and her offspring. They were shy, yet very curious. The roe deer barked like a dog when disturbed, and they were excellent swimmers.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the roe deer is actually referred to in such passages as 1 Kings 4:23; references may be to the fallow deer, although that animal does not seem to have lived in the southern part of Palestine around the Sinai Desert because of its need for ample amounts of food and water. Fallow deer were found in northern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The hart (the male red deer) was listed among the clean beasts that Jewish law permitted as food (Dt 12:15, 22; 14:5), but deer were not listed among the animals appropriate for sacrifice. The hind (female red deer) normally gave birth to one calf at a time, though twins were born with some degree of regularity (Jb 39:1; Ps 29:9, <span>kjv<\/span>; Jer 14:5). The gestation period was about 40 weeks. When it was about to give birth, the hind looked for a secure hiding place, preferably in the dense undergrowth of the forest where it could find natural protection for the tiny calf. During the first few days after birth, the mother never went far from her young. The fawn was able to stand on its own legs a few hours after birth. The solicitous care by the hind for her calf during the first days of its life is hinted at in a touching way in Jeremiah 14:4-5, where only a severe drought is said to drive the hind from her calf. Job 39:1-4 describes the calving of the hinds. The hind illustrated grace and charm (Gn 49:21; Prv 5:19), and its dark, gentle eyes and graceful limbs were used to describe the beauty of a woman (Prv 5:18-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dog\">Dog<\/p>\n<p>Probably the earliest domesticated animal <em>(Canis familiaris),<\/em> used very early in hunting. The modern dog is believed to have come from the Indian wolf <em>(Canis lupus pallipes).<\/em> The dogs of biblical times probably looked like a modern German shepherd, with short pointed ears, a pointed nose, and a long tail.<\/p>\n<p>The dog was generally looked down upon in biblical times (Prv 26:11; 2 Pt 2:22). The biblical writers did not share modern sentiments about dogs being man’s best friends. The dog was pictured as a scavenger, haunting streets and dumps (Ex 22:31; 1 Kgs 22:38; Mt 15:26; Lk 16:21). Human corpses could become the spoil of dogs (2 Kgs 9:35-36). In general, dogs served the same function as vultures and other birds of prey. Most of the 41 references in the Scriptures to dogs show strong disfavor. Dogs were considered cowardly, filthy creatures.<\/p>\n<p>Dogs used in hunting occur in paintings in Egyptian tombs, and there is a reference to dogs herding sheep in Job 30:1. One good quality of dogs highly esteemed by the Israelites was watchfulness (Is 56:10). In general, however, in biblical times “dog” was a term of contempt (1 Sm 17:43; 2 Sm 16:9) and was used of overly submissive persons (2 Sm 9:8; 2 Kgs 8:13) and of evil persons (Is 56:10-11; Mt 7:6; Phil 3:2; Rv 22:15).<\/p>\n<p>Dogs, like pigs, were voracious and omnivorous (eating any kind of food). In response to a Gentile woman’s request that he heal her daughter, Jesus used the metaphor of throwing household food scraps to dogs (Mt 15:22-28; Mk 7:25-30). At the time of Jesus, the word “dog” was a standard Jewish term of contempt for Gentiles who, like dogs, were considered unclean, although the diminutive form of the word, used by Jesus, softened this considerably. Seeing her faith, Jesus granted the woman’s request, giving a non-Jew some of “the children’s bread.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Donkey\">Donkey<\/p>\n<p>Beast of burden. The donkey of the Holy Land <em>(Equus asinus)<\/em> was quite different from the European donkey of today, which is usually a small, stubborn animal. In biblical times the donkey was a beautiful, stately, friendly animal. Its color was usually reddish brown. Three wild races have been described, all from Africa. The race from northwest Africa is extinct; the one from northeast Africa, if not extinct, is close to extinction; the Somalian race, which survives, did not play an important part in domestication. The northeast African race, the Nubian donkey, was evidently domesticated in the Nile River region in early historic times. The donkey was used as a mount from the time of domestication on. It is first mentioned in the Bible among the animals that Abraham acquired in Egypt (Gn 12:16). The donkey was primarily a beast of burden, driven but not bridled. From the time of the Middle Kingdom on (c. 2040 <span>BC<\/span>), it was used for riding in Egypt, but only the Jews and Nubians rode donkeys regularly. The donkey was also used for threshing grain and for pulling the plow. In Arab countries today peasants plow with a donkey and a cow or camel hitched together. In Israel the law forbade plowing with a donkey and an ox hitched together (Dt 22:10). Until the time of Solomon (960 <span>BC<\/span>), horses were not used in Palestine. From that time on, the horse was ridden by warriors; the donkey was used by those who were traveling peaceably.<\/p>\n<p>The donkey was held in high regard by the Jews and was considered an economic asset. An individual had to have a donkey for minimum existence (Jb 24:3), and wealth was frequently counted by the number of donkeys one possessed (Gn 12:16; 24:35). The donkey was considered an acceptable gift (Gn 32:13-15). It was allowed to rest on the Sabbath (Dt 5:14). Women in biblical times often used the donkey as a riding animal (Jos 15:18; 1 Sm 25:23; 2 Kgs 4:24); often a special driver would help a woman guide the animal, running along at its side. If a married couple possessed only one donkey, the husband usually walked alongside while the wife rode (Ex 4:20).<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel returning from Babylon had ten times as many donkeys as horses and camels (Ezr 2:66-67; Neh 7:68-69). Job’s wealth was indicated by the fact that he had 500 she-donkeys before catastrophe hit him (Jb 1:3); after his recovery he had 1,000 donkeys (Jb 42:12). Joseph’s brothers used donkeys to transport the grain they purchased in Egypt (Gn 42:26; 43:24). Abigail transported food on donkeys to David and his troops during their conflict with Saul (1 Sm 25:18). David assigned one of the 12 managers of his royal estates to look after his donkeys exclusively (1 Chr 27:30).<\/p>\n<p>The onager, or Syrian wild donkey <em>(Equus hemionus hemihippus)<\/em>, is an intermediate between the true horse and the true donkey. Its ears are longer than those of a horse but shorter than those of a donkey. The front hooves are narrow; there are chestnuts (callouslike spots on the inside of the knees) on the front legs only, and the tail is short haired for a long distance from its root so that it appears to be tufted.<\/p>\n<p>The Sumerians (ancient Mesopotamians) were able to domesticate the onager, which was eventually replaced by the horse. It was used to draw chariots in Ur; a number of onagers were buried with their vehicles in a royal grave that dates from about 2500 <span>BC<\/span>. Later the wild onager was a favorite hunter’s prize for Babylonian and Assyrian kings.<\/p>\n<p>The onager was very common in the steppe lands near Israel, where it was described as a freedom-loving desert animal (Jb 24:5; 39:5-8; Ps 104:11; Is 32:14; Jer 2:24; Hos 8:9). Ishmael was described as “free and untamed as a wild donkey” (Gn 16:12, <span>nlt<\/span>)—that is, one who could not adjust to domestic life. Drought seems to have been responsible for the population decline of the onager in biblical times (Jer 14:6). The modern onager <em>(Equus hemionus onager)<\/em> is slightly larger than the Syrian wild donkey that is extinct.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dragon\">Dragon<\/p>\n<p>Any one of a number of monstrous land and sea creatures. In biblical usage, “dragon” does not refer to the huge, fire-breathing, winged reptile of European folklore. The translators of the <span>kjv<\/span> used the term to translate two Hebrew words that are usually rendered more precisely in modern translations. One word referred to desert animals; most scholars agree with the <span>niv<\/span> that “jackals” is its proper meaning (Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; Jer 9:11; Mal 1:3). <em>See<\/em> Jackal (below).<\/p>\n<p>The other Hebrew word translated “dragon” is harder to define. It was frequently used in reference to serpents (so translated in the <span>rsv<\/span>: Ex 7:9-12; Dt 32:33; Ps 91:13). In other <span>rsv<\/span> passages it is translated “sea monster” (Gn 1:21; Jb 7:12; Ps 148:7). The exact identity of such sea monsters is not known. Several <span>rsv<\/span> passages retain the English “dragon.” In two of them (Ps 74:13; Is 27:1), the context indicates that sea monsters are meant. In three others (Is 51:9; Ez 29:3; 32:2) “dragon” seems to refer to the crocodile, a figurative reference to the Egyptian pharaoh at the time of the exodus. Jeremiah 51:34 (translated “monster” in the <span>rsv<\/span>) may also refer to a voracious creature such as a crocodile. <em>See<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\n<p>Babylonian myths described monsters and dragons in primordial conflict with the god Marduk; they represented the principle of evil. In its figurative usages in Scripture, “dragon” has a similar significance, especially in the prophetic books. In the book of Revelation it is a symbol of Satan, the archenemy of God and his people (Rv 12:3-17; 13:2, 4, 11; 16:13; 20:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fish\">Fish<\/p>\n<p>Aquatic animals frequently mentioned in the Bible without names or descriptions that enable us to identify the particular species. Since time immemorial, fish have constituted one of the staple foods of humanity, and they still serve as the chief source of protein in many parts of the world. The trade in fish was highly developed in biblical times. For example, one of the gates in Jerusalem was called the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3; Zep 1:10). The law in Leviticus 11:9-12 permitted the Jews to eat fish, but only those having both fins and scales. Scaleless fish such as catfish were forbidden, even though they had fins.<\/p>\n<p>Egyptian paintings depict various methods of fishing, and the Philistines fished in the Mediterranean Sea. Since the people of Israel were not a seafaring nation, it is safe to assume that most of their fish came from freshwater lakes and rivers, especially the Sea of Galilee. Some 36 species of fish have been identified in that lake, including varieties of perch, carp, barbel, “sardine,” and catfish.<\/p>\n<p>The method of fishing characteristic of NT times was the dragnet. After a boat had put out into the deep (Lk 5:4), a large net would be thrown out from it and then dragged toward shore by the rowers in the boat, possibly with the help of a crew in another boat. The catch was sorted out on shore (Mt 13:47-48). Fishing was usually carried out at night when the coolness of the water brought fish closer to the surface and when they could not see the approaching nets.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews also fished by hook and line (Mt 17:27), a few by spear (Jb 41:7), and some by the throw net (Ez 47:10). Habakkuk refers to hook-and-line fishing, netting, and seining (1:15).<\/p>\n<p>Very early in the history of the Christian church the fish became a symbol for Christ and the faith. It was scratched on the walls of Roman catacombs and may be seen today decorating walls, altars, pews, and vestments. The symbol came into use because the Greek word for “fish” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ichthus<\/span><em>)<\/em> is composed of the first letter of each word in the Greek phrase “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior.” <em>See<\/em> Whale (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Flea\">Flea<\/p>\n<p>Tiny, irritating insect (1 Sm 24:14; 26:20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many species of fleas occur in Palestine, the most common being <em>Pulex irritans.<\/em> About a thousand species are known around the world. Fleas are wingless parasites that have sharp jaws and suck out blood from the bodies of humans and animals. The body is wedge shaped, enabling the flea to burrow into folds of skin and hide there. The eggs, laid by the female in dust heaps in the corners of rooms, hatch into small, white larvae that pupate (a nonfeeding stage) in a cocoon. Soon adult fleas appear that immediately attach themselves to the body of a host. The female requires blood for the development of her eggs.<\/p>\n<p>A flea bite is painful and causes some swelling and itching. Fleas are attracted by warmth. With favorable moisture and temperature, adult fleas can live a year or longer without food, but they are voracious feeders. The most dangerous fleas are those of the rat that transmit the organism responsible for bubonic plague. There were 41 recorded epidemics of bubonic plague before the Christian era.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fly\">Fly<\/p>\n<p>Insects of the order Diptera, which have one pair of wings. Many winged insects of other orders, however, are also called flies, such as the dragonfly or butterfly.<\/p>\n<p>As in almost all parts of the world, flies are abundant in Palestine. One of the most numerous is the common housefly <em>(Musca domestica),<\/em> found chiefly around dung heaps and garbage. The female lays her eggs, out of which emerge white maggots that feed on refuse. After a few days the maggot develops into a cocoon out of which emerges the adult housefly. In the summer the whole cycle lasts about 12 days, so that a fly can breed about 20 generations a year.<\/p>\n<p>Another fly common to Palestine is the botfly (family Oestridae). It causes much discomfort among livestock by irritating them and spreading diseases. Tabanid flies (family Tabanidae), including the horsefly (genus <em>Tabanus<\/em>) and related species, are also found in Palestine. Both the botfly and horsefly are known as gadflies because of the persistent distress they inflict. Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar is spoken of as a gadfly in view of his invasion of Egypt (Jer 46:20).<\/p>\n<p>The fourth plague in Egypt just before the exodus featured “swarms of flies” (Ex 8:21-31, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Pss 78:45; 105:31). Those swarms may have been made up of any or all the flies mentioned above. The maggots mentioned in Job 25:6 and Isaiah 14:11 and the worms in Exodus 16:24 and Job 7:5 and 17:14 were probably fly larvae.<\/p>\n<p>A proverb quoted in Ecclesiastes 10:1 probably refers to the housefly, which would be attracted to an open, perfumed ointment bottle. Once inside it would drown and eventually decay, causing the ointment to spoil and stink. The fly is also referred to in Isaiah 7:18 where it symbolizes Egypt. Isaiah may have had in mind a horsefly <em>(Tabanus arenivagus)<\/em> that attacks both humans and animals.<\/p>\n<p>Philistine inhabitants of the city of Ekron worshiped a god named Baal-zebul, meaning “Lord of the high places.” The Hebrews mockingly spoke of Baal-zebub, meaning “Lord of the flies” (2 Kgs 1:2). The NT form is Beelzebub (e.g., Mt 10:25; 12:24, 27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fox\">Fox<\/p>\n<p>Small, doglike carnivore with a bushy tail that is about half its body length. The red fox of the Holy Land <em>(Vulpes palaetinae)<\/em> is similar to the North American red fox; it is smaller than a wolf and is normally a nocturnal solitary animal. The omnivorous fox eats almost any kind of food—fruits, plants, mice, beetles, and birds—but seldom touches carrion. It loves the sweet juice of grapes, but it also burrows underground tunnels that can destroy the vines (Sg 2:15). The fox is intelligent and known for its slyness (Lk 13:32). It has considerable endurance and can run at speeds up to 30 miles (48 kilometers) per hour. The Jews rebuilding Jerusalem’s wall were taunted by the wisecrack that even a fox jumping on their wall would knock it over (Neh 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptian fox <em>(Vulpes niloticus)<\/em> is found in the central and southern parts of the Holy Land. It is somewhat smaller than the common red fox. Its back is rust colored and its belly light. The Syrian fox <em>(Vulpes flavescens)<\/em> that lives in the northern part of the Holy Land is shiny gold in color.<\/p>\n<p>Some OT references such as Psalm 63:10 and Lamentations 5:18 are translated “fox” in the <span>kjv<\/span> but probably refer to jackals. Jackals, not foxes, hunt in packs and tend to act as scavengers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Frog\">Frog<\/p>\n<p>Amphibian (genus <em>Rana<\/em>), living part of its life in the water and part on land.<\/p>\n<p>Frogs and toads are covered with soft, hairless skin and lack a tail in the adult stage. The hind legs are much longer and more powerfully developed than the forelegs so that the animals are able to jump large distances. It has been suggested that the frog referred to in Scripture is an edible one, <em>Rana ridibunda,<\/em> one of the aquatic frogs found in Egypt and in the stagnant waters of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The female frog lays her eggs in the water; after about a week the eggs hatch into tadpoles. Gradually through metamorphosis the tail is lost and limbs are acquired. Frogs must maintain a moist skin since they take oxygen through the skin as well as through their lungs; thus they must always remain close to water. They feed on insects and worms.<\/p>\n<p>Frogs are found throughout the Palestinian lowlands, where their croaking is heard in the spring and on summer evenings. The Israelites seem to have associated frogs primarily with sliminess and foulness. They fell into the category of creeping or swarming creatures, which in general were ritually unclean (Lv 11:29-31). Since the frog was not specifically listed, however, rabbis did not consider it one of the animals that defiled human beings through contact.<\/p>\n<p>In Revelation 16:13 certain foul spirits are said to look like frogs. The ancient Egyptians made the frog a symbol of life and birth and an image of Heqet, the patron goddess of birth. She is depicted with a frog’s head giving life to the newborn. Thus that deity was discredited when the power of God afflicted Egypt in the second of the ten plagues on the Egyptians with the very animal that was her symbol (Ex 8:1-14; Pss 78:45; 105:30). The frog in question may have been the spotted frog of Egypt <em>(Rana punctata,<\/em> or <em>Rana ridibunda).<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gazelle\">Gazelle<\/p>\n<p>Small, dainty, graceful antelope with hollow recurved horns on both sexes. Two varieties exist in the Holy Land, the dorcas gazelle <em>(Gazella dorcas),<\/em> which is pale fawn in color and up to 22 inches (56 centimeters) tall, and the Arabian gazelle <em>(Gazella arabica),<\/em> which is a dark smoky color and up to 25 inches (63.5 centimeters) tall.<\/p>\n<p>Gazelles are still quite common throughout the desert and steppe areas of the Holy Land, especially in the Negev Desert. Herds usually consist of from 5 to 10 animals, but some varieties assemble in large migratory herds in the fall to relocate to lower elevations and new feeding grounds. Gazelles are herbivorous (plant eating). They are very shy and post guards to warn the herd of approaching danger.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times the gazelle was probably the game animal most hunted by the Jews (Prv 6:5; Is 13:14). Pharaoh Tutankhamen hunted gazelles and ostriches. The gazelle is said to have graced Solomon’s table (1 Kgs 4:23). Gazelles were not easy to catch because of their great speed (2 Sm 2:18; 1 Chr 12:8; Prv 6:5); they surpass the deer in swiftness. They were trapped in various ways—encircled with nets, driven into enclosures with pitfalls, or forced into narrow valleys and shot with arrows. The Bedouin hunt gazelle with falcons and dogs; the falcon annoys the gazelle, striking it on the head and injuring it so that the dogs can overtake it.<\/p>\n<p>The gazelle is referred to in Song of Songs 2:9, 17; 4:5; 7:3; 8:14, where it is an image of feminine beauty.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gecko\">Gecko<\/p>\n<p>Reptile of the family Gekkonidae, referred to in Leviticus 11:30. In Jewish food law it was a ritually unclean lizard. There are seven species of geckos in the Holy Land (including <em>Hemidactylus turcicus<\/em> and <em>Ptyodactylus hasselquistii,<\/em> all insectivorous—insect eating). The gecko makes a low mourning sound by vibrating its tongue rapidly against the roof of its mouth. In legend the gecko was said to cause leprosy by crawling across a person’s body.<\/p>\n<p>Another name for the gecko is the wall lizard, so named because it can walk upside down on ceilings with the aid of the suction discs on its toes—but it often plops down into the middle of the home. Since it was considered unclean, such an intrusion would have been a disgusting nuisance to Jewish households (Lv 11:31-38).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gnat\">Gnat<\/p>\n<p>Any very small fly, in common and biblical usage. According to the <span>nlt<\/span>, the third plague in Egypt before the exodus consisted of gnats (Ex 8:16-18; Ps 105:31). The <span>kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word there as “lice,” but the breeding pattern described in Exodus 8—insects rising from the dust—seems to fit gnats better than lice. Since “gnat” is a general term, the small flies of that plague may have included several small species such as mosquitos, harvester gnats, midges, or sand flies.<\/p>\n<p>The sand fly inflicts a far more painful bite than the mosquito. Further, it does not betray itself by a buzzing noise in flight and is so small that it penetrates most mosquito netting.<\/p>\n<p>Gnats were drawn to wine while it was fermenting. The Pharisees in particular would strain their wine to avoid consuming unclean insects (Mt 23:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Goat\">Goat<\/p>\n<p>Cloven-hooved mammals (genus <em>Capra<\/em>) with large eyes and big, floppy ears that constantly twitch. Both males and females have backward arching horns. The Palestinian goat is a ruminant (cud-chewing animal) of lighter build than the sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was probably the earliest ruminant to be domesticated. Its wild ancestor seems to have been the Gezoar goat <em>(Capra aegagrus).<\/em> Wild goats are believed to have been domesticated very early in Palestine. The goat of Bible times was probably the Syrian or Mamber variety <em>(Capra hircus mambrica).<\/em> Domesticated goats may have as many as four kids in a litter, whereas wild goats bear only one or two.<\/p>\n<p>The Palestinian goat was commonly black. Speckled and spotted goats were a rarity, and for that reason Jacob’s request for those goats in Genesis 30:32 appeared very modest. There may also have been red goats (cf. 1 Sm 16:12; 19:13, where goat’s hair was used to imitate David’s hair, which was “ruddy” or auburn).<\/p>\n<p>Almost every part of the goat was used by the Israelites. The whole goat was used for sacrifice. Its flesh served as meat (Lv 7:23; Dt 14:4), and it was the principal source of milk (Prv 27:27). Goats were sheared in the late spring, and the goat hair was used for weaving tent cloth and for various domestic purposes (Ex 36:14; 1 Sm 19:13, 16). The tabernacle at Mt Sinai was made of goat’s hair blankets (Ex 26:7).<\/p>\n<p>Adult male goats were generally not eaten because of their strong flavor and toughness and also because they were necessary to insure the flock’s increase. Young kids, however, were usually the chief meat for a feast and were offered to visitors as a symbol of hospitality. Goat milk is richer than the milk of cows and sheep and evidently had broader uses. A good goat gives three quarts of milk a day, from which a rich butter and buttermilk can be made. The average Hebrew family could have lived almost entirely on a single goat’s production.<\/p>\n<p>Goatskin was tanned as leather, and the whole hide was turned into a skin bottle by sewing shut leg and neck apertures (Gn 21:14; Jos 9:4). Goatskin had many uses, including the construction of Hebrew musical instruments. The nebal, a large harp, was made with goatskin for its base sound. Drums had goatskin coverings.<\/p>\n<p>Goats were herded with sheep in biblical times, but each group remained separate following its own bell-laden leader. Jesus was evidently referring to their common herding in his description of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Because of their wool, sheep are valued more than goats. However, where pasture and water are scarce and thorny shrubs dominate over grass, sheep are difficult to keep and goats become important. They can live under conditions that suit neither cows nor sheep, producing large quantities of milk. The goat does not supply fat as the sheep does, and since its hair is coarse its wool is rather scarce. Goat-hair cloth called cilicium was used to make tents.<\/p>\n<p>Goats have voracious appetites. They also were responsible for much damage done to the land of Palestine, breaking down terraces, destroying forests, and bringing about soil erosion by eating off all cover.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was recognized as a form of wealth, subject to the law of firstlings (Nm 18:17). It had to be eight days old before it could be offered as a sacrifice. A year-old male goat was one of the animals offered at the Passover (28:22), and two goats were offered on the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:7-10). The goat was also used for other specific sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p>The ibex, a type of wild goat <em>(Capra ibex nubiana),<\/em> still lives in small numbers on the cliffs close to the Dead Sea. That it was known in ancient times is evident from rock carvings. It is distinguished from the true wild goat by having a more compact rump and horns that are slender and curved back. Its slender legs and sharp cloven hooves enable it to cling to narrow rock ledges, to jump between them, and to climb steep cliffs.<\/p>\n<p>Usually the ibex is found in rugged mountain country among rocky crags and meadows just below the snow line (Ps 104:18). In Job 39:1 they are referred to as “mountain goats.” They frequently gather in herds of 5 to 20. They graze and browse, being active in the afternoon and sometimes feeding through the night. The large horn of the ibex was at one period made into the shofar that was blown in the second Jerusalem temple to announce the new year and the jubilee year.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was often used in a figurative and symbolic sense by the writers of the Bible: in Song of Songs 4:1 and 6:5 for the bride’s black hair; in Matthew 25:31-46 for the wicked; and in Ezekiel 34:17 and Daniel 8:5-8 for various human leaders.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Grasshopper\">Grasshopper<\/p>\n<p>Large insects of the Orthoptera order. They have chewing or biting mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the front pair of which is narrow and somewhat thickened and the hind pair membranous and used for flying. When not in use the flight wings are folded beneath the protective front wings like a fan against the body. By rubbing their wings together, male grasshoppers produce sounds that both males and females can detect. Grasshoppers pass through a partial metamorphosis; the egg hatches into a juvenile nymph that looks like an adult except for its smaller size and undeveloped wings. After several months the nymph becomes a winged adult.<\/p>\n<p>The terms “grasshopper” and “locust” are often used interchangeably. Actually the locust is a kind of grasshopper. Also confusing is the fact that other insects such as cicadas are sometimes called locusts. The difference between grasshoppers and locusts depends more on behavior than appearance. Grasshoppers are individual insects that lead solitary lives and do not migrate. The same insects when migrating in a swarm are called migratory grasshoppers or locusts. Elimination of their food supply by drought, flood, or fire may lead to migration. Climatic factors such as a warm dry winter also stimulate migrations.<\/p>\n<p>Grasshoppers and locusts have been a staple food in the Middle East and also among the Indians of the American Southwest. To the Israelites the grasshopper was considered ritually clean and could be eaten (Lv 11:22).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hare\">Hare<\/p>\n<p>Animal of the genus and species <em>Lepus europaeus judaeus, Lepus capensis,<\/em> and <em>Lepus arabicus.<\/em> It is found in open country, often near or on cultivated lands, and in woods, usually deciduous rather than evergreen. It is an herbivorous rodent and is different from the rabbit, which is not found in Palestine. Although it is not a true ruminant according to modern classification (because it does not have a four-chambered stomach), the hare does rechew its food. It has a process of partial regurgitation of material too hard for the cells in the stomach to absorb initially; thus, the hare actually chews food previously swallowed.<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern hares have very long ears and large hind feet; their feet are well furred. They are similar to American jackrabbits, which are true hares. Hares do not dig or occupy burrows the way rabbits do. Hares are mainly nocturnal and spend their inactive hours hiding in vegetation. They eat grasses and herbaceous matter as well as twigs and young bark of woody plants. Hares breed with great rapidity—the young attaining sexual maturity at six months after birth.<\/p>\n<p>The hare was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:6; Dt 14:7), evidently because although it appeared to chew its cud, it did not have cloven hooves. Consumption of hares has also been forbidden among the Arabs, Chinese, and Lapps, but the hare was widely hunted by other people in ancient and modern times. Its great speed, prolific breeding, timidity, and caution have saved it from extermination by its many enemies.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hippopotamus\">Hippopotamus<\/p>\n<p>Large beast of problematic interpretation. Some early interpreters thought it referred to the elephant, others to the wild ox, the mammoth, or any large animal. It was called “behemoth” by the <span>kjv<\/span> translators. Today it is generally agreed that the reference is to the hippopotamus <em>(Hippopotamus amphibius),<\/em> a large, thick-skinned, amphibious mammal, an ungulate (having hooflike toenails) with a large head, a bulky, hairless body, and short legs.<\/p>\n<p>The description in Job 40:15-24 fits closely the modern hippopotamus (see <span>nlt<\/span>), except for the depiction of the tail. At present the hippopotamus is found only in the rivers of Africa, but there is fossil evidence that it has existed in the Holy Land, perhaps in the swamps of northern Galilee and the Jordan Valley.<\/p>\n<p>The hippopotamus has highly developed sense organs, placed in such a way that it can see, hear, and smell almost without being seen; its eyes, ears, and nostrils can reach above water while the rest of the animal lies submerged. It has a large mouth, large tusks, and a short, heavy throat. The strong legs are so short that the belly almost reaches the ground when the animal is on the land. The hippopotamus lives on plants and herbs growing in rivers, but if food is scarce there, it forages on land, usually at night. In spite of its heavy body it is surprisingly agile on land.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Horse\">Horse<\/p>\n<p>Przewalski’s horse (<em>Equus przewalskii,<\/em> an eastern race that roamed about Mongolia until modern firearms destroyed most of them after World War I) and the tarpan (a western race of southern Russia that became extinct in the Ukraine in 1851). The domesticated horse <em>(Equus caballus)<\/em> seems to have been derived from the tarpan. The original site of domestication is believed to have been Turkestan, a region north of Afghanistan and India, now in Russia. The horse differs from the donkey in that it has shorter ears, a longer mane with a forelock, a long hairy tail, and a soft, sensitive muzzle.<\/p>\n<p>Horses were used in war not only for riding but also for pulling the heavy, springless war chariots. Two kinds of horses were needed for these different purposes, and the Hebrews distinguished between chariot horses and cavalry horses.<\/p>\n\n<p>The Lord warned the early Israelites against unnecessarily amassing military strength in the form of horses and thereby following the oppressive tactics of the powerful Egyptians (Dt 17:14-16), but the demands of war caused both David and Solomon to import horses from Egypt into their kingdoms and to breed them. Solomon greatly increased the number of horses in the Jewish kingdom and maintained large stables at various cities (1 Kgs 10:26) such as the regional defense centers of Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer (1 Kgs 9:15-19). Ahab’s horses are mentioned in 1 Kings 18:5, and records of Shalmaneser III state that Ahab furnished 2,000 chariots to a coalition against Assyria.<\/p>\n<p>In early Israel, the horse was opposed as a symbol of pagan luxury and of dependence on physical power for defense (Dt 17:16; 1 Sm 8:11; Ps 20:7; Is 31:1). Horse trading, mentioned as early as Genesis 47:17, was carried on by Solomon between Egypt and the Syro-Hittite principalities (1 Kgs 10:28-29). Most biblical references to horses refer to their use in war, but horses were also used for transportation. Riding seems to have been less popular than the use of chariots. Cavalry units were not introduced until the 12th century <span>BC<\/span> by the Medes. Joseph rode in Pharaoh’s second horse-drawn chariot (Gn 41:43), and Absalom made a display by riding a horse-drawn chariot (2 Sm 15:1). Naaman traveled by horse and chariot (2 Kgs 5:9). Later, horses were so common in Jerusalem that the royal palace had a special horse gate (2 Chr 23:15), and a gate of the city itself was known as the Horse Gate (Neh 3:28; Jer 31:40). Mordecai rode a royal horse of King Xerxes as a sign of honor (Est 6:8-11). Horses are often spoken of figuratively (Ps 32:9; “mare,” Sg 1:9; “stallions,” Jer 5:8; 12:5), especially in the context of judgment (Hb 3:8; Zec 1:8; 6:1-8; Rv 6:2-8; 9:17; 19:11-16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Warfare; Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hyena\">Hyena<\/p>\n<p>Stocky carnivore <em>(Hyaena hyaena)<\/em> with coarse hair, an erect mane, and long hairs along the neck and back. Hyenas live in holes among rocks and banks. They are mainly nocturnal but are ordinarily neither noisy nor aggressive. Their cry, however, is a disagreeable, unearthly sound. Hyenas usually feed on carrion, crushing bones with their powerful jaws. If the carrion supply is inadequate, they will kill sheep, goats, or other small animals. When threatened, hyenas growl and erect their mane, but they rarely fight. They are massively built with forelegs longer than the hind legs.<\/p>\n<p>Known as scavengers in Africa, hyenas eat domestic refuse in the villages. In Palestine the striped hyena is a common predator, preferring rocky territory and even rock tombs. Since hyenas were notorious for raiding the graves of the dead, all Israelites who could afford it arranged for burial in tombs protected by massive stone doors. Absalom, King David’s son who was killed by Joab in the wild, was buried under a huge pile of stones to protect his corpse from molestation by hyenas (2 Sm 18:17).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Jackal\">Jackal<\/p>\n<p>Carnivore <em>(Canis aureus)<\/em> smaller than the true wolf and with a shorter tail. It is similar to the fox but has a broader head, shorter ears, and longer legs. The fox is solitary; the jackal tends to be gregarious. Its tail can be drooping or erect, compared with the long horizontal tail of the fox. Jackals usually prowl at night, either singly, in pairs, or in packs through open savannah country. They eat small mammals, poultry, fruit, vegetables, and carrion. They spend their days in thickets and clumps of vegetation. Often they obtain scraps from kills by larger carnivores. Jackals can run at speeds of about 33 miles (53 kilometers) per hour.<\/p>\n<p>The jackal can reach a height of about 20 inches (51 centimeters), roughly the size of a German shepherd dog. Its back is pale yellow with dark, almost black, flanks. Its lips are black and its ears white on the inside. The howl of the jackal sounds like the crying of a child or the heartrending wail of the bereaved (Mi 1:8; cf. Jb 30:29). To other jackals the howl is merely an invitation calling the pack together for its nocturnal hunting.<\/p>\n<p>OT references are chiefly to jackals prowling around ruined cities and wilderness areas (Neh 2:13; Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; 34:13; 35:7; Jer 9:11; 14:6; 49:33; 51:37; Lam 4:3; 5:18; Mal 1:3). Many such references are translated “dragon” in the <span>kjv<\/span>, but “jackal” is more appropriate.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leech\">Leech<\/p>\n<p>Segmented worm (class Hirundinea) up to five inches (12.7 centimeters) long with a flat body equipped with suction pads at each end. The mouth, located at the bottom of the front suction pad, has three teeth that the leech uses to pierce the skin of its host. The leech feeds on blood, and its glands secrete an anticoagulant to prevent the blood from clotting. The ordinary medicinal leech (Hirudo medicinalis) is abundant in springs and ponds from the Negev Desert to Galilee. It adheres to the bodies of human beings and animals that submerge themselves in water, injects its anticoagulant, and sucks their blood.<\/p>\n<p>The reference in Proverbs 30:15 is uncertain (see <span>nlt<\/span>) but may be to the parasitic and greedy nature of the horse leech (genus <em>Haemopis<\/em>). The small horse leech enters its host’s mouth and nostrils from water while the animal is drinking. A leech weighing one-half ounce (14.2 grams) has been known to gorge itself with two and a half ounces (71 grams) of concentrated blood and then to exist for 15 months with no more to eat.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leopard\">Leopard<\/p>\n<p>Called <em>Panthera pardus tulliana,<\/em> it is the most widespread of all the large wildcats. In rocky areas it lives in caves, but in forested regions it lives in thick vegetation. In OT times many lived in the vicinity of Mt Hermon (Sg 4:8).<\/p>\n<p>The leopard is somewhat smaller than the tiger, measuring up to 5 feet (1.5 meters) in length with a tail of about 30 inches (.8 meter). Its body is better proportioned than that of the tiger. The leopard takes its victim by surprise from a silent ambush, often concealing itself near villages or watering places and waiting for its prey, remaining in one spot for long spans of time. The leopard is swift on the ground (Hb 1:8), agile in trees, and very graceful in its movements. Its color is yellowish speckled with black spots (Jer 13:23). Daniel and John saw visions in which leopards were symbols of world powers (Dn 7:6; Rv 13:2).<\/p>\n<p>The leopard is a wary and cunning animal, formidable and ferocious (Jer 5:6; Hos 13:7; cf. Is 11:6). The leopard is dangerous not only to domestic animals but also to humans. With its natural camouflage it can hide on the forest floor, blending into the changing light and shadows. The Israelites were terrified of the leopard because it constantly ravaged their sheep and goats. Several biblical place names suggest that they were known for the leopards in their vicinity: Nimrah, Beth-nimrah, and Nimrim, a district northeast of the Dead Sea. It has survived in the Holy Land into the present century; a few leopards still exist in remote areas near Mt Tabor and Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leviathan\">Leviathan<\/p>\n<p>Sea monster mentioned several times in the Bible (Pss 74:14; 104:26; Is 27:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). It may refer to any of the larger marine animals such as large jellyfish, whales, or sharks, or to a large reptile like the crocodile. Some scholars think “Leviathan” may refer to animals now extinct, such as ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs (marine reptiles similar to dinosaurs). The scriptural term might also refer to certain dinosaurs that spent part of their lives half-submerged in shallow lakes and oceans. Other scholars believe that most of the references are to the crocodile.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lion\">Lion<\/p>\n<p>Large, tawny-colored carnivore <em>(Panthera leo)<\/em> that preys chiefly on hoofed mammals and charges by a series of leaps and bounds. Within historic times the lion ranged in Africa, Europe, and the Holy Land. In ancient times the territories of the African and Persian lions met in the Middle East. The lion of the Holy Land was the Asiatic or Persian lion <em>(Panthera leo persica).<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The males have heavy manes that stop at the shoulders but cover much of the chest. The Persian lion cannot climb and is mainly nocturnal, returning to its lair or a thicket by day (Jer 4:7; 25:38; Na 2:11-12). This lion is about 5 feet (1.5 meters) long with a tasseled tail 30 inches (.8 meter) or so long; its shoulders may reach a height of 35 inches (.9 meter). It is one of the smallest of the lion breeds.<\/p>\n<p>Lions are usually found in pairs, though sometimes in larger numbers. A small group is known as a pride. They generally prefer open country but in Palestine evidently prowled the subtropical vegetation of the Jordan River valley. Lions, which usually hunt at dusk, kill smaller animals by a blow of the paw, larger ones by a bite in the throat. A lion does not remain in the same place for more than a few days. The animal is in its prime at about seven years of age, when it weighs from 400 to 600 pounds (181.6 to 272.4 kilograms).<\/p>\n<p>The lion does not characteristically attack humans, though like other great cats it may become a man-eater (1 Kgs 13:24-28; 20:36; 2 Kgs 17:25-26; Ps 57:4; Dn 6:7-27). Ordinarily, it attacks only out of great hunger or in self-defense. A very young lion that attacks humans can become dangerous if it develops a taste for human flesh. A very old lion, expelled from the pride because it can no longer keep up in the pursuit of antelope or gazelles, may choose humans as a relatively slow-moving prey.<\/p>\n<p>A lion generally roars only on a full stomach—that is, after it has consumed its prey (Ps 22:13; Ez 22:25; Am 3:4). Nevertheless, its roaring arouses fear (Am 3:8; 1 Pt 5:8). The lion is a bold (2 Sm 17:10; Prv 28:1), destructive animal (Ps 7:2; Jer 2:30; Hos 5:14; Mi 5:8), and the enemy of flocks (Am 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Lions were common in biblical times in all parts of the Holy Land. Hebrew has at least seven words for lion and young lion. The lion is referred to about 130 times in the OT—more than any other wild animal. Lions were evidently much less common in NT times. After gradually declining, they became extinct in Palestine shortly after <span>AD<\/span> 1300. The lion was present in Mesopotamia, however, until the end of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>Lions played an important part in the political and religious symbolism of the Near East (1 Kgs 10:19-20). In Assyria and Babylonia the lion was regarded as a royal beast (Dn 7:4). Oriental monarchs maintained artificial lion pits as places of execution (Ez 19:1-9; Dn 6:7-16). Animals for these were captured in camouflaged nets or pits. To the Jews, the lion was the mightiest of beasts (Prv 30:29-31). Thus, it symbolized leadership (Gn 49:9-10; Nm 24:9) and hence eventually became a title for Christ (Rv 5:5). It was also the ensign of Judah’s tribe and was used by King Solomon in the decoration of his house and the temple.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lizard\">Lizard<\/p>\n<p>Reptiles of the suborder Lacertilia. Their skin is covered with scales. The lizard is a useful creature because it captures harmful insects and worms. Like other reptiles, it lays eggs with shells softer than those of a bird and with no clear division between the yolk and the white. Lizards are “cold-blooded” organisms without a temperature-maintenance mechanism; hence, they become inactive in cold weather.<\/p>\n<p>Lizards can survive in barren parched countryside. In the Near East they are encountered in great numbers in the Arabian Desert, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Judean wilderness. There may be as many as 44 different species of lizards in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The Dabb lizard (genus <em>Uromastyx<\/em>), which attains a length of about 24 inches (61 centimeters), is found in the Negev Desert. It is omnivorous, an unusual trait since most lizards are insectivorous. It has a hard, rough skin, green with brown spots; a short, rounded head; and a powerful tail encircled with a row of strong spines that it uses as a weapon of defense.<\/p>\n<p>Lizards are listed as ceremonially unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:29-31). The fact that lizards crawl on their bellies made them unclean. Contact with a lizard’s carcass defiled a law-abiding Jew (Lv 11:32-36). The <span>nlt<\/span> translates the “lizards” of Leviticus 11 as “great lizard,” “gecko,” “monitor lizard,” “sand lizard,” and “chameleon.” The monitor lizard is a large lizard that lives in the deserts of southern Palestine, Sinai, and Egypt. It is up to 55 inches (1.4 meters) long with a long snout and sharp teeth. Other translators and commentators render the original Hebrew in a wide variety of ways, including “tortoise,” “ferret,” “lizard,” “snail,” “mole,” and even “water hen.” The fact that most of the original Hebrew words occur only once in Scripture makes it very difficult to be certain about their appropriate translation.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gecko (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Locust\">Locust<\/p>\n<p>An insect of the family <em>Acridiidae.<\/em> It is referred to by at least 12 different names in Scripture. The various Hebrew words may refer to different stages of its development from larva to adult or to the type of damage that it causes. Locusts are characterized by swarming and mass migration. In modern times they have caused extensive and disastrous destruction to vegetation. Grasshoppers do not swarm or migrate en masse, differentiating them from the true locusts.<\/p>\n<p>The OT mentions several different species of locusts. Leviticus 11:22 seems to refer to the slant-faced (bald) locust and also to the katydid, or long-horned grasshopper. The reference in Deuteronomy 28:42 may be to the mole cricket. In Joel 1:4 and 2:25 and in Nahum 3:16-17, successive stages of the insect’s development are described. The cutting locust (<span>kjv<\/span> “palmerworm”) of Joel is probably the first instar (stage of development), the swarming locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “locust”) are middle stages, and the hopping locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “cankerworm”) later instars but not yet fully matured insects. In the adult stage, called destroying locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “caterpillar”), the color of the locust is reddish brown, which turns to yellow with a brownish network on the wings.<\/p>\n<p>Only three of the hundreds of varieties of locusts found in Bible lands are capable of multiplying into great swarms, and only the desert locust <em>(Schistocerca gergaria)<\/em> can be considered widespread in all the Bible lands. The desert locust is native to the Sudan (Africa). It is a little over two inches (5 centimeters) long and has a wingspread of some five inches (12.7 centimeters). It shows two phases, a solitary phase and a gregarious phase, with a possible third phase known as transiens. There are differences in the immature and adult forms of the phases in color and physiology.<\/p>\n<p>The quantity and distribution of rains are important factors in the extent of swarming. Moist soil is needed for depositing the eggs and permitting them to develop. Each female deposits from one to six egg pods, containing 28 to 146 eggs each. The larvae emerge in 15 to 43 days.<\/p>\n<p>In the gregarious phase (from the second stage of metamorphosis onward), the locust is driven by a strong wandering instinct. Masses of them form a random procession of overflowing locust bodies that ignore any obstruction. They swarm over everything (Jl 2:4-9). The only regulator of their activities is temperature; they are immobilized by high or low temperatures. Taking to wing they may move 1,200 miles (1,930.8 kilometers) from their native home. They fly in compact formations large enough to blot out the light of the sun. Their movement seems to be controlled by hormones, but the direction is influenced by the wind. The swarms consume almost every plant in their path, sparing only the carob, sycamore, castor tree, and oleander bush.<\/p>\n<p>A locust plague was one of the most severe evils to come upon the ancient world (Dt 28:38). Joel 2:1-11 describes a locust plague in graphic terms, using it as a symbol of God’s destroying judgment. Special days of prayer, fasting, and trumpet blowing were prescribed to remove locust plagues (1 Kgs 8:37-38; 2 Chr 6:28-29; Jl 2:12-17). Locusts symbolized powerful and merciless enemies that completely destroyed the earnings of human toil (Jgs 6:5; Is 33:4; Jer 46:23; 51:27; Na 3:15).<\/p>\n<p>Bedouins eat locusts raw, roasted, or boiled, preserving them by drying and threading. They are also crushed and ground, and the grist used in cooking or eaten with bread, sometimes mixed with honey and dates. Such was the diet of John the Baptist (Mk 1:6). The Greeks ground locusts in stone mortars to make flour of them.<\/p>\n<p>The ancients considered the two large hind legs, or jumping legs, as separate limbs and had a special name for them. Hence locusts were described as having four legs, a reference to the four smaller walking legs. “Going on all fours” thus referred to creeping or walking as opposed to jumping and did not mean that the unclean insects had only four legs in all. Because of its two hind jumping legs, the locust was exempted from the prohibition against unclean insects (Lv 11:20-23).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mole\">Mole<\/p>\n<p>Rodent <em>(Spalax ehrenbergi)<\/em> from six to nine inches (15 to 23 centimeters) long, which burrows in any area where the soil is suitable for digging; it should be called a mole rat. Common in the Holy Land, large numbers are found in the vicinity of Jerusalem. Isaiah 2:20 refers to the mole, as does Leviticus 11:29-30 (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The mole rat has no tail and is molelike in appearance, but neither true moles nor shrews have ever been found in the Holy Land. The mole rat’s teeth are strong and protruding like those of a squirrel. The neck is short and thick with a plump body shaped like a sausage. The short legs have broad paws with claws adapted for burrowing. The fur is soft, thick, and ashen gray. Its ears and almost sightless eyes, which are no larger than poppyseeds, are hidden in the fur. Folklore taught that touching a mole rat would result in blindness.<\/p>\n<p>In the wet winter season the mole rat builds breeding mounds resembling those of pocket gophers. It builds less complex resting mounds in the summer, although both have rather elaborate tunnel systems. The mole rat feeds on roots, bulbs, tubers, and various other subterranean plant parts, often doing extensive damage to agriculture.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Moth\">Moth<\/p>\n<p>Insect of the genus <em>Tineola<\/em> that lays its eggs on wool or furs, its larvae feeding on those materials. The destructive qualities of moths are referred to in several biblical passages (Jb 13:28; Ps 39:11; Is 50:9; Hos 5:12; Mt 6:19-20; Lk 12:33; Jas 5:2). In Isaiah 51:8 “worm” (<span>nlt<\/span>) refers specifically to the larva of the clothes moth. The moth symbolizes disintegration, decay, and weakening. It is only the larvae that do the damage. The adult is quite harmless and feeds mainly on the nectar of flowers. It is easily crushed (Jb 4:19). The clothes moth reproduces in May or June. It enters human dwellings in the evening. A week after the eggs are laid the larvae appear and immediately begin their work of destruction, eating anything within reach made of animal fibers.<\/p>\n<p>The moth’s destructive activity is done in secret without any sound and without any dramatic appearance, such as a swarm that blots out the sun. In an age when wealth was counted more in possessions than in money, and when among those possessions wool clothing was highly valued, moths could literally cause economic disaster; hence the words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 6:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>There are hundreds of species of moths other than the clothes moth in the Holy Land; they are harmless to leaves, flowers, fruit, trees, and seeds. As with the clothes moth, the larvae inflict the damage.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mouse\">Mouse<\/p>\n<p>Rodent of the family Muridae, especially genus <em>Mus.<\/em> The mouse was regarded as unclean because, being short legged, it was considered one of the creeping creatures (Lv 11:29). Mice known as commensals live in dwellings and tend to have longer tails and to be darker in color than wild mice, which are active chiefly at night. Mice are good climbers and even good swimmers. Wild mice eat many kinds of vegetation, including seeds, fleshy roots, leaves, and stems. At times they store food.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word for “mouse” (Lv 11:29; 1 Sm 6:4-5; Is 66:17) is probably a general term for various rats and mice. The root meaning of the Hebrew word “mouse” is “destruction of corn,” a reference to the damage mice do to field crops. At least 23 varieties of mouselike rodents are known in the Holy Land. They cause food spoilage, damage household articles, and transport the host fleas that spread typhus, spotted fever, and bubonic plague. Plague bacteria may have caused the tumors or swellings among the Philistines (1 Sm 6:5). Isaiah 66:17 refers to a pre-exilic Canaanite cultic practice in which mice were eaten; the reference may actually be to the hamster. A number of rodents are eaten by Arabs of the Near East; the gerbil is considered a special delicacy. <em>See<\/em> Mole (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mule\">Mule<\/p>\n<p>Hybrid offspring of a male ass and a female horse <em>(Equus asinus mulus),<\/em> ordinarily sterile. The offspring of a female donkey and a stallion (male horse) is known as a hinny and is of little value because of its inferior size.<\/p>\n<p>Because crossbreeding was forbidden in the law (Lv 19:19), the Israelites procured mules from the Gentiles, perhaps from the Phoenicians, since Tyre (a Phoenician seaport in what is now southern Lebanon) imported horses and mules (Ez 27:14). Mules did not appear in Israel until David’s reign (2 Sm 13:29), possibly because of the rarity of horses among the Hebrews. Mules were used chiefly by members of the royal court and by other nobles. King David rode on a mule, and Solomon rode to his inaugaration on King David’s mule (1 Kgs 1:33). Absalom met his death riding on a mule (2 Sm 18:9). Mules were less common than horses, camels, and asses in the postexilic community (Ezr 2:66). In antiquity Asia Minor was especially noted for breeding fine mules.<\/p>\n<p>Mules have long enjoyed a reputation for obstinacy, but that trait is not mentioned in the Bible. The mule is prized for riding and for carrying heavy burdens, especially in warm mountainous regions. They are sure-footed and thrive best in hot, dry climates. The mule has the frugality, endurance, and steady gait of an ass along with the size, strength, swiftness, and courage of a horse. Mules are almost never sick. They live longer than horses. They can carry a load of up to 300 pounds (136 kilograms) as far as 30 miles (48.3 kilometers) a day.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Pig\">Pig<\/p>\n<p>Most properly, newborn swine. “Swine” is technically the better name for the species, but it is rarely used in common speech today. The domestic pigs of the Middle East derived from the wild pig <em>(Sus scrofa).<\/em> The pig is the most prolific and abundant supplier of meat and fat for food. A thick layer of fat just under the skin is especially pronounced in domestic breeds. Pigs cannot be driven, so they are of value only to the settled farmer. The Hebrews were originally a nomadic people; therefore, they had little use for an animal closely associated with settled life. An Egyptian prince of about 1500 <span>BC<\/span>, however, is recorded as owning a herd of 1,500 swine.<\/p>\n<p>The pig is clumsily built, yet lively and able to move with agility and speed. The most conspicuous characteristic of the pig is a truncated, mobile snout terminating in a disc-shaped surface on which the nostrils are located. Most pigs have large tusks in both jaws which grow continuously in life. The tusks of the upper jaw are unique in that they curve upward instead of pointing downward as in most animals. The excrement of a pig has an almost unbearable odor, which clings not only to the pig itself but also to swineherds, who can be identified a long way off.<\/p>\n<p>Pigs were never raised in the Holy Land by Jews. The great herd into which Jesus drove the unclean spirits was encountered in the land of the Gadarenes, a non-Jewish area east of the Jordan. The Gadarene demons took refuge in a herd of pigs feeding on a bluff overlooking the Sea of Galilee (Mt 8:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>Wild pigs were found in the Holy Land as in many countries today. Psalm 80:13 refers to the destructiveness of a wild boar (the male, or hog) attacking growing crops. A party of wild boars can destroy an entire vineyard or a field of crops in a single night. They devour, trample, and ravage everything within reach.<\/p>\n<p>Boar hunts were common in ancient Mesopotamia. Wild boars do not attack unless molested, but they are dangerous when aroused. They travel in bands of from 6 to 50 and are most active in the evening and early morning hours. The body is covered with stiff bristles and usually some finer hair, but the body covering is often quite scanty. Wild pigs are mainly vegetarian, feeding on roots, nuts, grains, and plant stems. Wild boars were particularly abundant in the mountainous regions of Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon, in the Jordan River valley, and in wooded sections such as Mt Tabor.<\/p>\n<p>Strict Jews would not even mention swine by name but would always substitute the term “the abomination.” Israelites considered themselves polluted if they were even touched by a swine’s bristle. To the Jews, the pig symbolized filth and ugliness. Pigs will eat fecal material, vermin, rodents, carrion, and the like (2 Pt 2:22). Proverbs 11:22 refers to the incongruity of a golden ring in the nose of an animal showing such characteristics. A similar metaphor occurs in Jesus’ statement about casting pearls before swine (Mt 7:6). The prodigal son’s degeneration was shown by his being forced in his poverty to feed pigs and eat their food (Lk 15:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Eating the flesh of pigs was forbidden to the Jews (Lv 11:7; Dt 14:8). The Canaanites in the Holy Land killed and ate pigs freely. In intertestamental times Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), a Syrian king whose territories included Israel, used the pig to “Hellenize” the Jews. He first tested their loyalty to the Jewish faith by requiring the consumption of pork, considered a delicacy by the Greeks (2 Macc 6:18). The act of desecration that drove the Jews to rebellion, however, was the sprinkling of pig blood on the temple altar in a sacrifice to Zeus (1 Macc 1:47).<\/p>\n<p>Pigs were frequently used in pagan worship (Is 65:4; 66:3, 17), which may account for their being forbidden to the Jews as food. Evidence in the Holy Land shows that pigs were sacrificed long before Hellenistic times. Pig bones were found in a grotto below the rock-cut place of sacrifice at Gezer. A similar underground chamber with vessels containing piglet bones at Tirzah dates to the middle Bronze Age (about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Alabaster fragments of a statuette of a pig ready to be sacrificed have been unearthed. Swine were sacrificed to Aphrodite (Venus) in Greece and Asia Minor. In addition, pigs were sacrificed in connection with oaths and treaties; in the <em>Iliad,<\/em> Agamemnon sacrificed a boar to Zeus and Helios. So it is not surprising that among the Jews the pig became a symbol of filthiness and paganism.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that eating pork was forbidden primarily because the pig may carry many worm parasites such as trichina, though that is also true of some “clean” animals. Another reason for forbidding their consumption may have been that pigs eat carrion. Some people are allergic to pork in hot weather—another suggested reason behind the Jewish taboo. The same taboo exists among the Muslims and existed in certain social strata in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Porcupine\">Porcupine<\/p>\n<p>Rodent, <em>Hystrix cristata,<\/em> which lives in forested areas, rocky hills, ravines, and valleys. The porcupine is still found in the Holy Land today. It has long quills that can be raised to give the appearance of a crest. It is almost entirely nocturnal. It burrows by day into a natural cavity or crevice. The Old World porcupine rarely climbed trees, although the New World porcupine frequently does. A porcupine may weigh as much as 60 pounds (27.2 kilograms). It eats fruit, bark, roots, and other vegetation, and carrion as well. Although its flesh is edible, the porcupine was not classed among the clean animals for the Israelites. The reference in Isaiah 34:11 (<span>rsv<\/span>) is probably to the porcupine, as is Isaiah 14:23 in the <span>nlt<\/span>. <em>See<\/em> Hedgehog.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Scorpion\">Scorpion<\/p>\n<p>Arthropod of the same group as spiders (arachnids). A dozen species of scorpions (order Scorpionida) are found in the Holy Land, but 90 percent of the scorpions are yellow scorpions, usually three to five inches (7.6 to 12.7 centimeters) long. The rock scorpion, also common to the Holy Land, is as thick as a man’s finger and from five to seven inches (12.7 to 17.8 centimeters) in length. Scorpions are slow, nocturnal invertebrates that rest beneath stones by day and prey on insects and other arachnids by night. At the end of its long tail the scorpion carries a poisonous sting that is fatal to most prey and extremely painful to humans (Rv 9:3, 5, 10; cf. 1 Kgs 12:11, 14). Scorpions symbolize Ezekiel’s evil countrymen (Ez 2:6) and the demonic forces of Satan (Lk 10:19). The scorpion is referred to as frequenting the Sinai Desert (Dt 8:15).<\/p>\n<p>A scorpion has from six to eight eyes. It has eight legs like a spider and two lobsterlike claws with which it catches and holds its prey. It feeds particularly on locusts and beetles. In many species the female scorpion eats the male after mating. Scorpions lay eggs that hatch very shortly after laying. Scorpions prefer warmer climates, and because of their desire for warmth, enter houses, especially at night, hiding in beds, blankets, footwear, and clothing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sheep\">Sheep<\/p>\n<p>Domestic animal, <em>Ovis orientalis,<\/em> referred to directly or by some term such as ewe, lamb, ram, or by some fact concerning them over 700 times in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Sheep represented the chief wealth and total livelihood of pastoral peoples, providing food to eat, milk to drink, wool for the making of cloth, and hides and bones for other uses. In addition, the sheep was a medium of exchange and a sacrificial animal. The number of sheep raised in ancient times was prodigious. Mesha, king of Moab, paid a tribute annually of 100,000 lambs and the wool of 100,000 rams (2 Kgs 3:4). The Israelites took 250,000 sheep from the Hagrites (1 Chr 5:21).<\/p>\n<p>Sheep shearing was often done for festivals (2 Sm 13:23). The sheep was held down on its side and its legs were tied together; then it lay docilely while its wool was clipped (Is 53:7). Sheep reserved for burnt offerings were not shorn; nothing could be held back from a sacrifice to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Wool had to be processed before it could be used for clothing. First it was washed, sometimes while still on the sheep, then carded and perhaps weighed for the market. The spinning of wool was regarded as a woman’s work (Prv 31:19), but weaving the spun thread into cloth on a loom was primarily a man’s occupation.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible reports that Abel kept sheep (Gn 4:2). The first sheep to be domesticated was probably the argali <em>(Ovis ammon),<\/em> a variety of the urial <em>(Ovis vignei),<\/em> a mountainous species still existing in Turkestan and Mongolia. Five breeds had reached Mesopotamia by 2000 <span>BC<\/span>; all were of the urial stock.<\/p>\n<p>The sheep known in Israel was the broad-tailed sheep <em>(Ovis orientalis vignei<\/em> or <em>laticaudata),<\/em> of which the tail weighs from 10 to 15 pounds (4.5 to 6.8 kilograms) and has always been considered a delicacy. Thus the Lord asked for this choice part as a sacrifice (Ex 29:22-25).<\/p>\n<p>Only the ram of the broad-tailed sheep has horns, but in other varieties of sheep in the Holy Land the ewe also has horns. The horns, two to three inches (5 to 8 centimeters) in diameter, can be potent weapons. Rams’ horns could be used as trumpets (Jos 6:4) or as oil containers (1 Sm 16:1).<\/p>\n<p>Although the sheep is very similar to the goat, it is differentiated by a lower forehead, its angulated spiral horns marked with transverse wrinkles and curved slightly outward, its covering of wool, and its lack of a “goatee.” Most sheep are white (Ps 147:16; Is 1:18; Dn 7:9; Rv 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>The flesh of sheep was a luxury in the biblical culture. King Solomon required a daily provision of 100 sheep for his table (1 Kgs 4:23), but the common people ate lamb or mutton only on festive occasions. A young ram was usually chosen because the ewes were more important to the future prospects of the herd. The meat was boiled in large caldrons. The milk of the sheep is extremely rich; in biblical times it was usually allowed to curdle before drinking. Possibly some Israelites kept lambs in their houses as pets (2 Sm 12:3-4).<\/p>\n<p>To protect the flock at night against predatory attacks, the shepherd tried to provide a fold. In meadows near villages, folds were built and watchmen were hired to relieve the shepherds. The shepherds of the nativity story were out in the field (Lk 2:8); they had no fold but probably had set up a tent for shelter, consisting simply of goat-hair blankets spread across sapling supports. The scarcity of springs in the Holy Land made the watering of the flock a crucial problem for the shepherd (Gn 13:8-11).<\/p>\n<p>Wild mountain sheep, varieties of <em>Ovis orientalis,<\/em> are known in the Mediterranean area (Dt 14:5). The Deuteronomy passage (<span>kjv<\/span> “chamois”) might also refer to <em>Ovis traelaphus,<\/em> a sheep about five feet high (1.5 meters) with long, curved horns. Another possibility is the Barbary sheep that lives in small flocks in rugged mountain areas in Barbary, Egypt, and Mt Sinai. The true chamois is unknown in Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The sheep is also used figuratively in Scripture. The ram represented great strength and fittingly symbolized Medo-Persia in Daniel’s vision (Dn 8:3). It is the nature of sheep to be gentle and submissive (Is 53:7; Jer 11:19), defenseless (Mi 5:8; Mt 10:16), and in constant need of guidance and care (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36). Such qualities are regarded as desirable in the lives of believers in Christ; hence the many figurative references to sheep in the NT and to Jesus as shepherd (Mk 6:34; Jn 10:1-30; Rom 8:35-37; Heb 13:20-21; 1 Pt 2:25). The resurrected Christ told the apostle Peter to “feed my lambs” and “tend my sheep” (Jn 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Snail\">Snail<\/p>\n<p>Invertebrate gastropods (mollusks). Land snails are very numerous in the Near East. Some freshwater forms serve as hosts for the schistosome worm, the fluke parasite causing the dread disease bilharzia (schistosomiasis).<\/p>\n<p>Purple dyes of all shades were highly valued in the ancient world. A royal purple dye was obtained from secretions of a sea snail <em>(Murex trunculus<\/em> and <em>Murex brandaris).<\/em> Evidently, that process was developed by Phoenicians, Egyptians, and Assyrians as early as 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. The “purple” fishermen had their own guild during the time of the Roman Empire. The snails were harvested during the fall and winter seasons; in the spring, when egg laying took place, little dye was available. The snails tended to remain concealed in the summer. They inhabited the waters off Crete and Phoenicia. Tyrian purple, produced in the Phoenician city of Tyre, the center of the purple-dye industry, was obtained by a double dyeing. Large deposits of murex shells from dyeing operations have been found along the Mediterranean shoreline. The Israelites had to import purple goods (Ez 27:16). Lydia was a “seller of purple” or of cloth so dyed (Acts 16:14). Purple was a sign of distinction, royalty, and wealth (cf. Ex 25:4; 28:5-6, 15; Nm 15:38; 2 Chr 2:7; Est 8:15; Prv 31:22; Sg 3:10; Ez 27:7; Dn 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 30:34-35 refers to “onycha,” which was an important ingredient of incense. Onycha is the horny, clawlike operculum (the plate that closes off the opening of its shell when a snail is retracted) of a Near Eastern member of the molluskan family Strombidae. The operculum is sometimes used for offense or locomotion as well as for defense. When burned, the operculum gives off a sharp, strong scent, and when mixed with more fragrant but less powerful substances is even more potent. The name “onycha” is derived from a Greek word <em>(onyx)<\/em> for a fingernail or a claw.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Snake\">Snake<\/p>\n<p>Various species of snake, suborder Ophidia (Serpentes). In the Bible nine Hebrew words and four Greek ones refer to snakes. The most common Hebrew word is onomatopoeic—that is, it is an imitation of a snake hissing or of the sound it produces as it scrapes its scales along the ground (cf. Jer 46:22). Many types of snakes lay eggs (Is 59:5), although some retain the eggs in the body until ready to hatch.<\/p>\n<p>Snakes are among the most widespread reptiles and are found on all continents except Antarctica; they decrease in numbers and species toward the poles but increase as one approaches the equator. Thirty-three species of snakes are known in Palestine and neighboring countries, 20 of which are poisonous. Two dangerous characteristics of the snake noted by biblical writers are its inconspicuous way of moving and the ease with which it hides itself.<\/p>\n<p>Many snakes are able to swallow animals several times their own diameter because of their unusually flexible jaw mechanism. They lack not only legs but also movable eyelids. Snakes periodically shed their skins. The tongue is actually a hearing apparatus sensitive to airborne vibrations and probably to heat waves.<\/p>\n<p>The venom of poisonous species is a clear, thin secretion, transmitted to the victim’s bloodstream by means of fangs. Two types of venom are known: that of the vipers, which affects respiration and disintegrates red blood cells, and that of the cobras, which paralyzes the nervous system.<\/p>\n<p>The “asp” referred to in the Bible is probably the cobra; the “adder” is the viper. The “cockatrice” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is probably the adder. Serpents were associated with worship in Canaanite religion and symbolized evil deities among many other peoples. Steles (upright stones bearing inscriptions) have been unearthed at several sites in the Holy Land and Syria depicting a god or worshiper with a snake winding about the legs or body. Because the Israelites were burning incense in pagan worship of Moses’ bronze serpent (Nm 21:8-9), King Hezekiah destroyed it in his religious reform (2 Kgs 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Although snakes have been an object of veneration in some religions, in the Judeo-Christian tradition snakes represent evil and, more specifically, the devil. That association began in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:1-15) and is also found in the book of Revelation (12:9; 20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adder (above); Asp (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Spider\">Spider<\/p>\n<p>Animal of the order Araneida. Between 600 and 700 different species inhabit the Holy Land. Spiders are different from insects in that, like scorpions, they have four pairs of legs instead of three. Spiders are equipped with poison glands—the effectiveness varying from species to species. A few can kill only insects, but others can also kill birds and mice.<\/p>\n<p>Most spiders have a pair of spinnerets attached to silk glands on the underside of the abdomen; from them a web is extruded. In the Bible the spider’s web is referred to as a symbol of frailty and insecurity (Jb 8:14; Is 59:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sponge\">Sponge<\/p>\n<p>Simple marine animals, phylum Porifera. The term “sponge” also refers to those animals’ skeletal remains. The sponge has a porous body composed of tubules and cells.<\/p>\n<p>Sponge fishing was well known in the Mediterranean area in ancient times. It was practiced particularly along the Anatolian and Syrian coasts. Sponges were harvested by divers. The use of sponges in absorbing liquids is referred to in the Bible (Mt 27:48; Mk 15:36).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Unicorn\">Unicorn<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Wild Ox (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wasp\">Wasp<\/p>\n<p>Insects of the family Vespidae. Hornets are social wasps that build large aerial apartment houses in which 1,000 or more individuals may live. In the Bible the hornet is used as a metaphor for God’s use of military forces (Ex 23:28; Dt 7:20; Jos 24:12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Whale\">Whale<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all living creatures, including those that have become extinct. Whales are air-breathing mammals of the order Cetacea.<\/p>\n<p>Two varieties of whales visit the shores of the Holy Land at times. The finback whale <em>(Balaenoptera physalus)<\/em> weighs about 200 tons (181 metric tons) and lives mainly in the Arctic region but sometimes passes through the Straits of Gibraltar to reach the eastern Mediterranean Sea. It feeds on small marine organisms that it strains through its whale bone; it does not have teeth. The finback whale’s esophagus is narrow.<\/p>\n<p>The sperm whale <em>(Physeter catodon),<\/em> about 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, has a curiously shaped head that looks like a battering ram. The teeth in the lower jaw of the male sperm whale are about seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long. It feeds on big fish, even on sharks. It has a large throat opening.<\/p>\n<p>Whales are referred to in Genesis 1:21 and Job 7:12 (<span>kjv<\/span> only). The “great fish” of Jonah 2:1 need not have been a whale but could have been a large shark, such as the whale shark <em>(Rhineodon),<\/em> which grows 70 feet (21.3 meters) long and lacks the terrible teeth of other sharks. Whatever the actual marine organism, Jonah’s deliverance was miraculous. The Greek word for “whale” is sometimes used as a general term for “sea monster” or huge fish and may be used in that sense in Matthew 12:40.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WildOx\">Wild Ox<\/p>\n<p>Large, fierce, fleet, intractable animal <em>(Bos primigenius).<\/em> It had a long, lean rump with a straight back and a long, narrow head. The animal described in Job 39:9-12 is clearly the wild ox. The two horns (Dt 33:17), its outstanding characteristic, were straight and as long as the head (Nm 23:22; 24:8; Ps 22:21). Kings often symbolized their dominion by wearing a helmet with two wild ox horns (cf. Pss 92:10; 132:17-18). The horns were often used as drinking vessels by the Israelites; some were large enough to hold four gallons (15 liters).<\/p>\n<p>Hunting the wild ox was a favorite sport of Assyrian kings. Tiglath-pileser I hunted it in the Lebanon Mountains about 1100 <span>BC<\/span> (cf. Ps 29:6). At one time the animal referred to in Job 39:9-12 was thought to be the oryx or antelope because of the similarity between the Hebrew word in Job and the Arabian name for oryx. The translators of the <span>kjv<\/span> called the wild ox a “unicorn” because of representations found on Babylonian mosaics and Egyptian drawings. Those representations showed it in strict profile, showing only one horn—hence, “unicorn.” Jerome’s Vulgate, a Latin Bible translation (fourth century <span>AD<\/span>) and Martin Luther’s German version translated it similarly.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wolf\">Wolf<\/p>\n<p>Large doglike mammal <em>(Canis lupus)<\/em> that travels in bands of up to 30 animals. From the nose to the rump, the wolf measures about 3 feet (.9 meter); its drooping tail is about 18 inches (.5 meter) long. It looks much like a skinny German shepherd dog. The grayish yellow pelt is coarse and short haired.<\/p>\n<p>Wolves hunt singly or in relays, usually at night (Jer 5:6). Wolves have acute hearing and sight but rely chiefly on scent and usually catch their prey in a swift, open chase. The wolf has a reputation for boldness, fierceness, and voracity (Gn 49:27; Hb 1:8). It commonly kills more than it can eat or drag away and thus is known for its greediness.<\/p>\n<p>The wolf is a restless animal, always on the move; hunger drives it from one place to another in constant search of new hunting grounds. During spring and fall, wolves usually roam singly or in pairs, whereas in summer they may travel in family groups. In winter, several such groups may join to form a large pack. Wolves are intelligent, social creatures, faithful to their own kind. They mate for life. Individually, the wolf is a rather timid animal; it would much rather avoid human beings. But collectively wolves can be among the most dangerous animals alive.<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt, Rome, and Greece the wolf was considered sacred. Wolves were well known in the Holy Land and are still found there and also in many places in Asia Minor. Shepherds continually battled with wolves that plundered their flocks (Jn 10:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible refers to wolves in a literal sense in only three places (Is 11:6; 65:25; Jn 10:12), all other references being figurative. Usually the wolf is a symbol of enemies or the wicked (e.g., Ez 22:27; Zep 3:3; Acts 20:29). Both the wolf’s courage and its cruelty were probably in the mind of the patriarch Jacob when he predicted the fate of Benjamin’s tribe (Gn 49:27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Worm\">Worm<\/p>\n<p>Actually insect larvae in most biblical references, usually maggots, the larvae of flies (see Fly, above). For example, maggots are evidently referred to in accounts of worms feeding on spoiled manna (Ex 16:19-20), corpses (Jb 21:26; Is 14:11), or open wounds (Jb 7:5). Mark 9:48 refers to a maggot that eats dead flesh. In Acts 12:23 a fatal, worm-induced abdominal disease of King Herod is mentioned. In other cases, the reference is to the larvae of other insects (Is 51:8). In Deuteronomy 28:39 and Jonah 4:7 the vine weevil <em>(Cochylis ambiguella)<\/em> is probably referred to; it destroys vines by boring into their stems. Comparing a man to a worm is a metaphor for abasement (Jb 25:6; Ps 22:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANIMALS In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals ...","summary_en":"ANIMALS In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7302,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandments, the Ten","title_en":"Commandments, the Ten","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENTS, The Ten<\/h3>\n<p>List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from which comes the name Decalogue). According to the biblical text, they are “words,” or laws, spoken by God, not the result of human legislative process. The commandments are said to have been written on two tablets. This does not mean that five commandments were written on each tablet; rather, all ten were written on each tablet, the first tablet belonging to God the lawgiver, the second tablet belonging to Israel the recipient. The commandments pertain to two basic areas of human living: the first five concern relationships with God, the last five, relationships between human beings. The commandments were given first to Israel in the making of the covenant at Mt Sinai, shortly after the exodus from Egypt. Though the date of the Sinai covenant cannot be fixed with certainty, it was probably around 1290 <span>BC<\/span>. In order to understand the commandments, it is necessary first to understand the context in which they were given.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>• The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheContextoftheCommandments\">The Context of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments are inseparable from the covenant. The making of a covenant between God and Israel at Sinai was the formation of a particular relationship. God made certain commitments to Israel and in return imposed certain obligations upon Israel. Although Israel’s obligations are expressed in detail in a mass of precise legal material, they are given their most precise and succinct expression in the Ten Commandments. The commandments set down the most fundamental principles of all Hebrew law, and the detailed laws contained in the Pentateuch are for the most part applications of the principles to particular situations. Thus, the role of the Ten Commandments in ancient Israel was to give direction to a relationship. They were not to be obeyed simply for the sake of obedience, as though obedience accumulated some kind of credit. Rather, they were to be obeyed in order to discover the fullness and richness of life in a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The commandments in ancient Israel were not an ethical code or compilation of advice on the fundamentals of morality. The covenant was between God and a nation; the commandments were directed toward the life of that nation and its citizens. Consequently, the initial role of the commandments was similar to that of criminal law in a modern state. Israel was a theocracy, a state whose king was God (Dt 33:5). The commandments provided guidance to the citizens of that state. In addition, to break a commandment was to commit a crime against the state and the ruler of that state, God. Thus, the penalties were severe, for the breaking of the commandments threatened the covenant relationship and the continued existence of the state. This state context is important for understanding the commandments in their initial form.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningoftheCommandments\">The Meaning of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The commandments begin with a preface (Ex 20:2; Dt 5:6) that identifies the lawgiver, God, who gave the commandments to a people with whom he already had a relationship. The lawgiver is the God of the exodus, who redeemed his people from slavery and granted them freedom. The preface is vital, for it indicates that God’s gift of law was preceded by an act of love and grace. The commandments were given to a people who had been redeemed; they were not given in order to achieve redemption. There are some variations in the manner of numbering the commandments. According to some systems, the preface is identified with the first commandments. It seems preferable, however, to understand the opening words as a preface to all ten commandments. In the notes on the Ten Commandments that follow, there is first an explanation of the original meaning, then some indication of the contemporary meaning.<\/p>\n<h5>First Commandment: Prohibition of Worshiping Gods Other Than the Lord (Ex 20:3; Dt 5:7)<\/h5>\n<p>The first commandment is in negative form and expressly prohibits the Israelites engaging in the worship of foreign deities. The significance of the commandment lies in the nature of the covenant. The essence of the covenant was a relationship, and the essence of relationship, from the biblical perspective, is faithfulness. God’s faithfulness to his people had already been demonstrated in the exodus, as indicated in the preface to the commandments. In turn, God required of his people, more than anything else, a faithfulness in their relationship with him. Thus, though the commandment is stated negatively, it is full of positive implications. And its position as first of the ten is significant, for this commandment establishes a principle that is particularly prominent in the social commandments (six through ten).<\/p>\n<p>The contemporary significance of the commandment is in the context of faithfulness in relationship. At the heart of human life, there must be a relationship with God. Anything in life that disrupts that primary relationship breaks the commandment. Foreign “gods” are thus persons, or even things, that would disrupt the primacy of the relationship with God.<\/p>\n<h5>Second Commandment: Prohibition of Making Images (Ex 20:4-6; Dt 5:8-10)<\/h5>\n<p>The second commandment prohibits the Israelites from making images of the Lord. To make an image of God, in the shape or form of anything in this world, is to reduce the Creator to something less than his creation and to worship the created instead of the Creator. The temptation for Israel to worship God in the form of an image must have been enormous, for images and idols flourished in all the religions of the ancient Near East. But the God of Israel was a transcendent and infinite being, and could not be reduced to the limitations of an image or form within creation. Any such reduction of God would be so radical a misunderstanding that the “god” worshiped would no longer be the God of the universe.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, the shape of the temptation has changed. Few are tempted to take power tools and shape from wood an image of God. Nevertheless, the commandment is still applicable and the danger against which it guards is always present.<\/p>\n<h5>Third Commandment: Prohibition of the Improper Use of God’s Name (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11)<\/h5>\n<p>There is a popular understanding that the third commandment prohibits bad language or blasphemy; however, it is concerned with the use of God’s name. God had granted to Israel an extraordinary privilege; he had revealed to them his personal name. The name, in Hebrew, is represented by four letters, <em>YHWH,<\/em> which are variously rendered in English Bibles as <span>Lord<\/span>, Yahweh, or Jehovah. The knowledge of the divine name was a privilege, for it meant that Israel did not worship an anonymous and distant deity but a being with a personal name. Yet the privilege was accompanied by the danger that the knowledge of God’s personal name could be abused. In ancient Near Eastern religions, magic was a common practice. Magic involved the use of a god’s name, which was believed to control a god’s power, in certain kinds of activity designed to harness it for human purposes. Thus, the kind of activity that is prohibited by the third commandment is magic, namely, attempting to control God’s power, through his name, for a personal and worthless purpose. God may give, but must not be manipulated or controlled.<\/p>\n<p>Within Christianity, the name of God is equally important. Through God’s name is access to God in prayer. The abuse of the privilege of prayer, involving calling upon the name of God for some selfish or worthless purpose or swearing falsely by it, is tantamount to the magic of the ancient world. In both, God’s name is abused and the third commandment is broken. Positively, the third commandment is a reminder of the enormous privilege of knowing God’s name, a privilege not to be taken lightly or abused.<\/p>\n<h5>Fourth Commandment: Requirement to Observe the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15)<\/h5>\n<p>This commandment, once again, has no parallels in ancient Near Eastern religions; furthermore, it is the first of the commandments to be expressed in a positive form. While most of life was characterized by work, the seventh day was to be set aside. Work was to cease and the day was to be kept holy. The holiness of the day is related to the reason for its establishment. Two reasons are given, and though at first they appear different, there is a common theme linking them. In the first version of the commandment (Ex 20:11), the Sabbath is kept in commemoration of Creation; God created in six days and rested on the seventh day. In the second version (Dt 5:15), the Sabbath is observed in commemoration of the exodus from Egypt. The theme linking the two versions is creation: God not only created the world but also “created” his people, Israel, in redeeming them from Egyptian slavery. Thus, every seventh day throughout the passage of time, the Hebrew people were to reflect upon Creation; in so doing, they were reflecting upon the meaning of their existence.<\/p>\n<p>For most of Christianity, the concept of “sabbath” has been moved from the seventh to the first day of the week, namely Sunday. The move is related to a change in Christian thought, which is identified in the resurrection of Jesus Christ on a Sunday morning. The change is appropriate, for Christians now reflect each Sunday, or “Sabbath,” on a third act of divine creation, namely the “new creation” that is established in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.<\/p>\n<h5>Fifth Commandment: Requirement to Honor Parents (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16)<\/h5>\n<p>The fifth commandment forms a bridge between the first four, concerned primarily with God, and the last five, concerned primarily with human relationships. On first reading, it appears to be concerned with family relationships only: children are to honor their parents. Although the commandment establishes a principle of honor or respect in family relationships, it is probably also related to the responsibility of parents to instruct their children in the faith of the covenant (Dt 6:7), so that the religion could be passed on from one generation to another. But instruction in the faith required an attitude of honor and respect from those who were being instructed. Thus, the fifth commandment is concerned not only with family harmony but also with the transmission of faith in God throughout subsequent generations.<\/p>\n<p>With the fifth commandment, there is little need to convert its meaning into contemporary relevance. At a time in which so much education is undertaken beyond the confines of the family unit, the commandment serves a solemn reminder, not only of the need for harmonious family life, but also of the responsibilities of religious education which rest upon both parents and children.<\/p>\n<h5>Sixth Commandment: Prohibition of Murder (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).<\/h5>\n<p>The wording of this commandment simply prohibits “killing”; the meaning of the word, however, implies the prohibition of murder. The word used in the commandment is not related primarily to killing in warfare or to capital punishment, both of which are dealt with in other portions of the Mosaic law. The word could be used to designate both murder and manslaughter. Since manslaughter involves accidental killing, it cannot be sensibly prohibited; it, too, is dealt with in other legislation (Dt 19:1-13). Thus, the sixth commandment prohibits murder, the taking of another person’s life for personal and selfish gain. Stated positively, the sixth commandment preserves for each member of the covenant community the right to live.<\/p>\n<p>In the modern world, a similar statute prohibiting murder exists in almost all legal codes, having become a part of state law, in addition to purely religious or moral law. Jesus, however, pointed to the deeper meaning implicit in the commandment. It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, that is evil (Mt 5:21-22).<\/p>\n<h5>Seventh Commandment: Prohibition of Adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18)<\/h5>\n<p>The act of adultery is fundamentally an act of unfaithfulness. One or both persons in an adulterous act are being unfaithful to another person or persons. Of all such crimes, the worst is that which signifies unfaithfulness. It is for this reason that adultery is included in the Ten Commandments while other sins or crimes pertaining to sexuality are not included. Thus, the seventh commandment is the social parallel to the first commandment. Just as the first commandment requires absolute faithfulness in the relationship with the one God, so the seventh requires a similar relationship of faithfulness within the covenant of marriage.<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of the commandment is apparent, but again Jesus points to the implications of the commandment for the mental life (Mt 5:27-28).<\/p>\n<h5>Eighth Commandment: Prohibition of Theft (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The eighth commandment establishes a principle within the covenant community concerning possessions and property; a person had a right to certain things, which could not be violated by a fellow citizen for his or her personal advantage. But while the commandment is concerned with property, its most fundamental concern is human liberty. The worst form of theft is “manstealing” (somewhat equivalent to modern kidnapping)—that is, taking a person (presumably by force) and selling him or her into slavery. The crime and the related law are stated more fully in Deuteronomy 24:7. The commandment is thus not only concerned with the preservation of private property but is more fundamentally concerned with the preservation of human liberty, freedom from such things as slavery and exile. It prohibits a person from manipulating or exploiting the lives of others for personal gain.<\/p>\n<p>Just as the sixth commandment prohibits murder, so the eighth prohibits what might be called “social murder,” that is, the cutting off of a man or woman from a life of freedom within the community of God’s people.<\/p>\n<h5>Ninth Commandment: Prohibition of False Witnessing (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20)<\/h5>\n<p>The commandment is not a general prohibition against lies. The wording of the original commandment sets it firmly in the context of Israel’s legal system. It prohibits perjury, or the giving of false testimony within the proceedings of the law court. Thus, it establishes a principle of truthfulness and carries implications with respect to false statements in any context. Within any nation, the courts of law must be able to operate on the basis of true information. If law is not based on truth and righteousness, then the very foundations of life and liberty are undermined. If legal testimony is true, there can be no miscarriage of justice; if it is false, the most fundamental of human liberties are lost. Thus, the commandment sought to preserve the integrity of Israel’s legal system while guarding against encroachments on personal liberties.<\/p>\n<p>The principle is maintained in most modern legal systems—for example, in the taking of an oath before giving evidence in court. But in the last resort, the commandment points to the essential nature of truthfulness in all interpersonal relationships.<\/p>\n<h5>Tenth Commandment: Prohibition of Coveting (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The tenth commandment is curious in its initial context. It prohibits the coveting, or desiring, of persons or things belonging to a neighbor (that is, a fellow Israelite). To find such a commandment in a code of criminal law is unusual. The first nine commandments prohibited acts, and a criminal act can be followed by prosecution and legal process if detected. But the tenth commandment, in contrast, prohibits <em>desires,<\/em> or covetous feelings. Under human law, it is not possible to prosecute upon the basis of desire, since proof would be impossible. While the crime involved in the tenth commandment could not be prosecuted within the limitations of the Hebrew system, it was nevertheless known by God, the “Chief Judge.” The genius of the commandment lies in its therapeutic nature. It is not enough merely to deal with crime once it has been committed; the law must also attempt to attack the roots of crime.<\/p>\n<p>The root of almost all evil and crime lies within the self, in the desires of the individual. Thus evil desires are prohibited. If covetous desires are gradually eliminated, then natural desires may be directed toward God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePrincipleoftheCommandments\">The Principle of the Commandments<\/p>\n<p>The relevance of each commandment is understood in the underlying principle of the whole Decalogue. The principle of the whole is the principle of love, the heart of Israel’s religion. God loved Israel and called them in love. In return, he imposed one commandment upon Israel that superseded all others: “You shall love the <span>Lord<\/span> your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:5, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is the central commandment of Israel’s religion. How to love the invisible, intangible God is partly explained in the Decalogue. For the person who loves God, the Ten Commandments provide guidance; they point to a way of life that, if lived, reflects love for God and leads to a deeper experience of God’s love. Therefore, the Ten Commandments continue to be a central part of Christianity. Jesus repeated the commandment to love from Deuteronomy 6:5 and he called it “the first and greatest commandment” (Mt 22:37-38). Consequently, the Ten Commandments still serve as a guide for the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENTS, The Ten List of commands given by God to Moses. The Ten Commandments are stated twice in the OT; first in the book of Exodus (20:2-17), in a passage describing God’s gift of the commandments to Israel, and second in Deuteronomy (5:6-21), in the context of a covenant renewal ceremony. Moses reminds his people of the substance and meaning of the commandments, as they renew their covenant allegiance to God. In the original language, the commandments are called the “Ten Words” (from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7971,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covet, Covetousness*","title_en":"Covet, Covetousness*","content_ro":"<h3>COVET, COVETOUSNESS*<\/h3>\n<p>The desire to have something for oneself that belongs to another—a craving or passionate desire. Three Hebrew words are translated “covet” in the OT (see <span>rsv<\/span>). In one recital of the Ten Commandments (Dt 5:21) the text reads, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.” The same Hebrew word occurs in Proverbs 21:26: “All day long the wicked covets.” Another word implies dishonest gain (Hb 2:9). In the Exodus listing of the Ten Commandments, a third word is used for craving a neighbor’s wife (Ex 20:17). The same word is used of Achan’s coveting of the spoils of Ai (Jos 7:21; cf. Mi 2:2). To covet is to desire inordinately, to place the object of desire before love and devotion to God.<\/p>\n<p>That idea is conveyed in the NT by a Greek word literally meaning “inordinate desire to have more.” The apostle Paul listed that kind of covetousness among earthly attitudes of which Christians are to rid themselves. “Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry” (Col 3:5, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Eph 5:3; 1 Cor 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>Covetousness is pictured as a serious sin that leads to a variety of other sins. The love of money is the root of all evils (1 Tm 6:9-10; cf. Prv 15:27). It was the sin of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-3; cf. 1 Sm 15:9, 19; Mt 26:14-15; 2 Pt 2:15; Jude 1:11). Jesus warned: “Take heed, and beware of all covetousness; for a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (Lk 12:15, <span>rsv<\/span>). Another Greek word translated “covet” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is better translated “earnestly desire” in a positive sense (1 Cor 14:39).<\/p>\n<p>The translators of the OT who produced the Septuagint used still another Greek word for the three Hebrew words rendered “covet” in English versions. In the NT the verb form of that word is used in both a positive and negative sense. It means “to desire or long for,” whether food (Lk 15:16), the divine mysteries (Mt 13:17; 1 Pt 1:12), some good thing (Phil 1:23; Heb 6:11), or some evil thing (Mt 5:28; 1 Thes 4:5; 1 Jn 2:17). The noun form of the same word generally reflects an attitude of disobedience to the law of God in which desire has given place to an evil impulse that results in sin (Jn 8:44; Rom 1:24; 6:12; 7:7-8; 13:14; Gal 5:16, 26).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVET, COVETOUSNESS*<\/h3>\n<p>The desire to have something for oneself that belongs to another—a craving or passionate desire. Three Hebrew words are translated “covet” in the OT (see <span>rsv<\/span>). In one recital of the Ten Commandments (Dt 5:21) the text reads, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.” The same Hebrew word occurs in Proverbs 21:26: “All day long the wicked covets.” Another word implies dishonest gain (Hb 2:9). In the Exodus listing of the Ten Commandments, a third word is used for craving a neighbor’s wife (Ex 20:17). The same word is used of Achan’s coveting of the spoils of Ai (Jos 7:21; cf. Mi 2:2). To covet is to desire inordinately, to place the object of desire before love and devotion to God.<\/p>\n<p>That idea is conveyed in the NT by a Greek word literally meaning “inordinate desire to have more.” The apostle Paul listed that kind of covetousness among earthly attitudes of which Christians are to rid themselves. “Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry” (Col 3:5, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Eph 5:3; 1 Cor 6:10).<\/p>\n<p>Covetousness is pictured as a serious sin that leads to a variety of other sins. The love of money is the root of all evils (1 Tm 6:9-10; cf. Prv 15:27). It was the sin of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-3; cf. 1 Sm 15:9, 19; Mt 26:14-15; 2 Pt 2:15; Jude 1:11). Jesus warned: “Take heed, and beware of all covetousness; for a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (Lk 12:15, <span>rsv<\/span>). Another Greek word translated “covet” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is better translated “earnestly desire” in a positive sense (1 Cor 14:39).<\/p>\n<p>The translators of the OT who produced the Septuagint used still another Greek word for the three Hebrew words rendered “covet” in English versions. In the NT the verb form of that word is used in both a positive and negative sense. It means “to desire or long for,” whether food (Lk 15:16), the divine mysteries (Mt 13:17; 1 Pt 1:12), some good thing (Phil 1:23; Heb 6:11), or some evil thing (Mt 5:28; 1 Thes 4:5; 1 Jn 2:17). The noun form of the same word generally reflects an attitude of disobedience to the law of God in which desire has given place to an evil impulse that results in sin (Jn 8:44; Rom 1:24; 6:12; 7:7-8; 13:14; Gal 5:16, 26).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVET, COVETOUSNESS* The desire to have something for oneself that belongs to another—a craving or passionate desire. Three Hebrew words are translated “covet” in the OT (see rsv). In one recital of the Ten Commandments (Dt 5:21) the text reads, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.” The same Hebrew word occurs in Proverbs 21:26: “All day long the wicked covets.” Another word implies dishonest gain (Hb 2:9). In the Exodus listing of the Ten Commandments, a third word is used for craving ...","summary_en":"COVET, COVETOUSNESS* The desire to have something for oneself that belongs to another—a craving or passionate desire. Three Hebrew words are translated “covet” in the OT (see rsv). In one recital of the Ten Commandments (Dt 5:21) the text reads, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.” The same Hebrew word occurs in Proverbs 21:26: “All day long the wicked covets.” Another word implies dishonest gain (Hb 2:9). In the Exodus listing of the Ten Commandments, a third word is used for craving ...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11920,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Family Life and Relations","title_en":"Family Life and Relations","content_ro":"<h3>FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refer to setting up a separate dwelling as well as establishing a family. In the broader sense, “house” may refer to an entire nation (“house of Israel”). The heads of families returning from Babylon in the postexilic period controlled sometimes several hundred family members (Ezr 8:1-14). The family was a smaller part of a clan and tribe. In nomadic times the responsibilities and allegiances centered on the larger family group.<\/p>\n<p>Those who belonged to the clan knew that they had to work for common interests and accept responsibility for the whole group. All members of the family were to be protected and assisted in time of need.<\/p>\n<p>As the life of the Israelites became more settled, families (in the wider sense of the term) lived in villages surrounded by fields of wheat, barley, and flax, with areas of grazing land for sheep and goats. Each group of villages consisted of an intermarried, interdependent family group, such as that of the Danites of Zorah and Eshtaol (Jgs 18:11). The hard life of those days demanded a sharing of work and the loyal cooperation of the entire family for survival.<\/p>\n<p>As crafts and trades developed, along with a more sedentary lifestyle, sons learned their fathers’ skills and continued the family trade. Consequently, the whole village might follow a particular craft (1 Chr 4:14; Neh 11:35). By specializing in such trades, however, the villagers became less self-sufficient, depending more on farmers for food and on other specialized villages for the production of cloth or pottery (1 Chr 4:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>With the growth of cities, related groups lived together in specific areas. Many members of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah were listed in the census of Jerusalem by Nehemiah (Neh 11:4-8), and by the writer of Chronicles (1 Chr 9:3-9). One consequence of life in the cities was the fragmentation of the family group. As the bonds of the wider family were loosened, the unit consisted increasingly of a husband and wife with their children, living in one house. The size of houses that have been excavated precludes the idea of any larger family unit as the norm in OT societies.<\/p>\n<p>During the kingdom period, King David’s sons Amnon and Absalom set up their own separate houses (2 Sm 13:7-8, 20). At that time there were few slaves in Hebrew society, but they also were considered members of the family. As bonds of the wider family loosened, and the master of the household lost a degree of authority, the society became one in which the king was sovereign and all the people were his subjects.<\/p>\n<p>The early kings of Israel promoted such a change in order to establish a central ruling authority for the entire country. The king’s subjects fell broadly into the categories of employers and employees, corresponding to the rich and poor of society. By the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, members of the wider family no longer worked for the communal good under the authority of the clan’s head; rather, individuals worked primarily for the good of their own immediate family. Hence one’s labor and devotion were focused more narrowly, and the greatest beneficiary was the king, the personal symbol of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>Emphasis on the smaller family unit increased, and old duties that had been willingly accepted by the wider groups in former times came to be neglected. People did not always help relatives in times of need, and they frequently had to be reminded of their obligations, particularly toward widows and orphans (Is 1:17; Jer 7:6). Family feuds also declined because members no longer felt responsible to take vengeance as a way to uphold the honor of the clan (2 Sm 3:27; 16:8; 2 Kgs 9:26). Nevertheless, Nehemiah expected Israelites to fight for their family honor (Neh 4:14). In NT times, the family was such a unit that it could be sold for a debt incurred by one of its members (Mt 18:25).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew religion’s emphasis on family participation in certain celebrations strengthened the small unit. The Passover, for example, was always celebrated as a family thanksgiving meal (Ex 12:3-4, 46). The prophet Samuel’s parents made a traditional annual pilgrimage to the shrine at Shiloh (1 Sm 2:19). In modern times, a young Jewish boy’s arrival at the threshold of manhood is celebrated with the Bar Mitzvah ceremony. Being so honored in the midst of a religious family preserves the ancient Hebrew tradition of family participation in religious ceremonies.<\/p>\n<p>In his preaching Jesus used the family as a symbol for the relationship of God to his people (Mt 19:14; 23:9; Lk 8:21). From the cross he handed over responsibility for the care of his mother to his disciple John (Jn 19:27).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times, the communion meals in the Jerusalem church took place by households (Acts 2:46). Early Christian meetings were held in the homes of believers because of opposition by the authorities. The book of Acts contains examples of entire families being converted to Christianity (Acts 10:24, 44-48; 16:15, 31-32). Timothy learned the gospel from his grandmother and mother (2 Tm 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>• Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>• Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>• The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>• Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>• In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"StatusofFamilyMembers\">Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>From nomadic times, a father’s authority held the family group together in their encampment, and he became the symbol of their security. In ancient patriarchal societies, the father was an absolute master who had the power of life and death over family members, ruling with unchallenged authority. Although he had extensive responsibilities for those under his care, his power was awesome and his status unquestioned.<\/p>\n<p>A man’s possessions included his wife, servants, slaves, and animals (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). In fact, the phrase “to marry a wife” comes from a Hebrew root meaning “to become the master of a wife.” A husband was as much the master of his wife as he was of his home or his fields. Consequently, the wife addressed him in a subservient manner, as a slave would address a master (Gn 18:12; Jgs 19:26). This low status for a woman extended to a daughter’s position in the ancient household. Females were always under the authority of a male relative: first, the father; then a husband. If a woman became a widow, she was subject to her husband’s nearest male relative, who became her “redeemer.” The bride price (Gn 29:18, 27; Ex 22:16-17; 1 Sm 18:25; 2 Sm 3:14) paid by her husband was not exactly a purchase of the woman from her father, but the exchange of money did stigmatize her. The amount of a bride price depended on the father’s status (Gn 34:12). The usual price was probably 20 to 30 shekels of silver. The bride received gifts of jewelry, ornaments, and clothing from her future husband, and she occasionally enjoyed some sort of financial or material return from the bride price for her own use (Jos 15:19; Jgs 1:15). When her father or husband died, the money frequently reverted to her.<\/p>\n<p>An engaged woman was considered her fiancé’s property just as much as if she were already married to him (Dt 22:23-27). The woman left her own family at marriage, to live with and become part of her new husband’s family. Normally, any succeeding marriages would be with members of that family.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the low legal status of the mother of the family, her life was not as bad as one might suppose. She was the legal wife, not an unpaid servant, and she frequently took a strong role as adviser to her husband in family affairs. Her most important function, aside from childbearing, was organization of the household, of which she was generally the respected manager. Even though the wife might have been acquired through capture in war (Dt 21:10-14), she could not be sold as a slave or daughter could (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5).<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, her position was precarious, in that she could be disowned or divorced by her husband as the result of a simple renunciation: “She is no longer my wife, and I am no longer her husband.” Perhaps he had found fault with her culinary skills, or possibly he was casting his eyes on another woman. In any event, a husband knew that if his wife did not obey even a signal or a glance, he was within his rights to obtain a divorce (cf. Ecclus 25:26). The wife, however, obtained a certain degree of protection in the letter of repudiation, by which her freedom was formally restored. Under Jewish tradition, a wife could not divorce her husband.<\/p>\n<p>In matters of domestic protocol, the Hebrew wife was not introduced to her husband’s guests, a tradition that subsequently led to considerable embarrassment for Abraham’s wife, Sarah, and for Rebekah (Gn 20:16). A woman normally remained veiled in public (24:65; 38:14; Is 47:2).<\/p>\n<p>The imagery in Proverbs 19:13 and 27:15 draws a vigorous comparison between a contentious woman and water dripping from a leaky roof. The OT leaves little doubt about the type of behavior expected from a woman. She was expected to be charming, soft-spoken, discreet, and calm (Prv 9:13; 11:16, 22; 21:9). She was also to be responsible, well-organized, intelligent, thoughtful, reverent, and a good manager of both the household and the family purse (31:10-31). A woman should also be pious and beautiful, and in NT tradition, submissive to her husband, as befitted a woman adorned with the priceless jewel of a gentle and quiet spirit (Ti 2:4-5; 1 Pt 3:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The actions of a few women whose roles in life do not seem to fit the pattern of the meek, passive female pictured above, are recorded in the Bible and the Apocrypha. The books of Judith and Esther recount heroic tales of how national fortunes were saved by women. Deborah and Jael were renowned heroines (Jgs 4–5), and the kingdom of Judah was ruled by a vicious woman, Athaliah, for several years (2 Kgs 11). The women who stepped to the forefront of public life were exceptional and few in number. Judith was a rich widow, an unusual thing in Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MaritalSecurity\">Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>The security of a wife’s position improved considerably when she produced her first child, particularly if it was a son. A woman’s primary duty to her husband and his family was procreation (Gn 1:28; 9:1), and until she gave birth to a son, she feared displacement by a second wife or a concubine. Polygamous marriages were by no means rare, especially in wealthy families. They resulted in two ill-defined family groups, controlled by the mothers but under the overall authority of fathers; there were inevitable jealousies and frictions.<\/p>\n<p>The legal status of a woman was consistently poor in Bible times. With no evidence at all, a husband could accuse his wife of adultery, and she was compelled to face a trial by ordeal. She had to abase herself by taking an oath, eating dust and a cereal offering, and drinking bitter water. A priest, meanwhile, made pronouncements regarding the dire results that would come to her if she were guilty: she would become an outcast with no hope of survival. But if she maintained her serenity, and if her thigh did not rot nor her abdomen swell, she was considered to have “proved” her innocence. In such an event she would go free, and her husband bore no blame whatsoever for his false accusation (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a woman took a vow, it was legal only as long as her father or husband approved it. If she became a widow, the vow still remained in force and could be used against her (Nm 30:3-15).<\/p>\n<p>A woman in Israel was always under the protection of a male, be it her father, grandfather, great-grandfather, brother, husband, or some other member of her husband’s family. She had few legal rights and, in contrast to Babylonian traditions, could not inherit at her husband’s death. It is small wonder that widows were classed with orphans and the poor. A childless widow could on occasion return to her father’s family (Gn 38:11; Lv 22:13; Ru 1:8), thus becoming subject again to the authority of her father. A Hebrew widow could also remain with her late husband’s family. She would then come under the protection of her “redeemer,” a male relative of her husband’s family who assumed responsibility for her. If a husband died leaving a woman childless, it was the responsibility of the husband’s brother to marry her. The first son born of such a union was then regarded as the heir of the first husband.<\/p>\n<p>It was normal for a brother to accept the obligation for such a marriage (levirate). It could be refused on various grounds, but such refusal was considered dishonorable, for it was a man’s duty to perpetuate his brother’s name and to safeguard the family fortune.<\/p>\n<p>A redeemer’s responsibilities were considerable. In addition to the marriage, he was perhaps involved in avenging the family reputation, and he had to ensure that family property increased and remained within family control.<\/p>\n<p>If an Israelite fell into debt and was forced to sell himself into slavery, he would normally be “redeemed” by one of his relatives (Lv 25:47-49). If in his penury an Israelite had to sell his land or his house, the redeemer had the right of first refusal over all other prospective purchasers. It was as much his duty as his right to prevent family property from passing into the hands of strangers (v 25). The prophet Jeremiah bought his cousin Hanamel’s field under similar circumstances (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar OT story of a childless widow, her “redeemer,” and their levirate marriage is recorded in the book of Ruth. One of Naomi’s two sons married Ruth. When Ruth was widowed, her impoverished mother-in-law, Naomi, left her home in Moab and returned to Bethlehem to sell some of the family property. Although a close relative was prepared to buy the land and keep it in the family, he was not ready to marry Ruth as well (Ru 3:12; 4:4). He knew that a son of that union would be deemed a son of the deceased, bearing the dead husband’s name, and thus ultimately inheriting the land (4:4-6). The next relative in order of kinship was Boaz, who became Ruth’s “redeemer.” He was prepared to accept the double obligation of purchasing the land and marrying Ruth (4:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PositionofChildren\">Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>Children were generally well loved, but their childhood was short and they were often regarded as laborers for the house or fields. According to the law of primogeniture, the eldest son received a double portion of the estate as his birthright (Dt 21:17). Thus, he was assured of the position of family head. Even during his father’s lifetime, the eldest son took precedence over his brothers and sisters (Gn 43:33). Where twins were born, the first to emerge from the womb was considered the elder, with all the attendant privileges (25:24-26; 38:27-30).<\/p>\n<p>For a serious offense, the eldest son could lose the right of primogeniture (Gn 35:22; 49:3-4; 1 Chr 5:1), or it could be surrendered voluntarily, as Esau did by selling his birthright to his brother Jacob (Gn 25:29-34). There was a law protecting the eldest son from his father’s favoritism for a younger brother (Dt 21:15-17). Nevertheless, King David gave his kingdom to Solomon, his youngest son (1 Kgs 2:15).<\/p>\n<p>In a family with no sons, a daughter could inherit property (Nm 27:8). Frequently, parents consulted neither sons nor daughters when marriage partners were arranged for them. Marriage was often an alliance or contract between two families, and thus the wishes and concerns of individuals were considered unimportant. Love matches were few, although occasionally a son would marry in defiance of his parents, as Esau did (Gn 26:34-35). Although it was rare for young people to express their feelings and preferences about marriage in an open fashion, Saul’s daughter, Michal, made known her love for David (1 Sm 18:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is no record of legal adoption among the Hebrews, but it was practiced from ancient times in Mesopotamia. It was especially useful as a means of ensuring a childless couple that their land would be tilled and that they would be cared for in their old age. All examples of adoption mentioned in the OT took place outside the land of Israel (Ex 2:10; 1 Kgs 11:20; Est 2:7, 15) and are not examples of true adoption as a lifetime member of a family.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRightsofChildren\">The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>The nature of patriarchal society made for unfortunate distinctions between male and female children. The position of a daughter, who could be sold into slavery or sold to be the concubine of a man and then possibly sold again (Ex 21:7-11), was certainly inferior to that of a son. In the patriarchal period, however, both a son and a daughter could be put to death for disobeying the head of the family. One’s children could also be sacrificed in worship rituals (see Gn 22; Jgs 11). It is probable that infant sacrifice was practiced by nations neighboring Israel, including Canaan and Ammon.<\/p>\n<p>The rights of children were improved considerably with the promulgation of the code of Mosaic law. A father was no longer permitted to put his child to death without referring the case to the elders (Dt 21:18-21). Both sons and daughters could be brought before such authorities and accused of being disobedient, gluttonous, or drunkards. A father’s absolute authority even extended to his married son and family if they were living under his roof. The law also prohibited children from being held responsible for the crimes of their parents (Dt 24:16). In King David’s time a person convicted by the community had the right of appeal to the king (2 Sm 14:4-11).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew families both parents were held in high respect. Honor had to be given to both mother and father (Ex 20:12), and the law condemned offenses against either parent (21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 21:18; 27:16). Respect due to the mother is a recurrent theme in the Wisdom Literature (Prv 19:26; 20:20; cf. Ecclus 3:1-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DailyLifeoftheHebrewFamily\">Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>In the everyday affairs of a Hebrew household, it was the father’s responsibility to maintain the family fortune and to be the provider. He might work in the fields, most probably with crops of flax, barley, or wheat. Or he would work at a trade, possibly as a weaver, builder, potter, dyer, fuller, or a worker in copper or bronze. If he lived near the shore, he might be a fisherman.<\/p>\n<p>The father was also responsible for the religious well-being of the family. It was his duty to take over his sons’ education from the mother at an early age, teaching them the tenets of Hebrew religion (Ex 10:2; 12:26; Dt 4:9; 6:7). He also explained all the facets of the law and the interwoven history of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the disciplinarian of the family, with the rod being used to drive home the lessons taught (Prv 13:24; 22:15; 29:15-17). Though children were loved and valued, they were not pampered (Ecclus 30:9-12). In postexilic times education also took place within the precincts of the synagogue, and shortly before the time of Christ, a general elementary education was introduced. It was also imperative that a father teach his sons a trade, normally his own, for a man without a trade either starved or became a thief. Another important paternal responsibility was to provide wives for male offspring in the household.<\/p>\n<p>The mother was responsible for her sons’ and daughters’ early education (Prv 1:8; 6:20), teaching them religious songs and prayers as soon as they could talk. A father took over the education of his sons, but the mother continued with the daughters, training them to spin, weave, cook, clean, trim the lamps, and generally to become competent in all the household duties (31:13-31).<\/p>\n<p>With little furniture, keeping a house clean meant sweeping the floors to keep them free from dust and dirt. Cooking was at once simple and difficult. It was simple in that much of the food was cooked in the form of a soup or stew, or else made into a cake and cooked on a griddle. It was difficult in that the corn had to be ground by hand and bread was baked daily.<\/p>\n<p>A mother was expected to take wool, card it, spin it, and often weave and make clothes for her family. In addition, she would help her husband in the fields at harvesttime. Because many families had one or more olive trees, a few grapevines, and fig trees, the mother would also assist in picking the fruit. She would sometimes work at the press when the olives or grapes were being processed. Frequently the treading of grapes in the family vat would be done together by husband and wife. Drawing water from the well was considered a menial task and was generally the wife’s responsibility, although sometimes it was assigned to the children (Gn 24:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>As in all societies, there was a time when children laughed and played together (Zec 8:5; Mt 11:16), although childhood and adolescence were not recognized as specific stages of development. Children were considered as sucklings if under three, but were regarded as boys or girls when they were able to take care of themselves. A small child sat on his mother’s lap and was played with (Is 66:12). There is no evidence of organized sports for children. Toys, including whistles, rattles, dolls, and miniature cooking utensils, have been excavated at Palestinian sites.<\/p>\n<p>As soon as a boy was old enough, he took his place in the family and accepted his appointed task. Among other things, children were expected to gather fuel (Jer 7:18). Young boys and girls tended the flocks. The sheep had to be protected from marauding wild beasts, guarded against their own folly when they wandered near crevices, steered toward good pasture and water, and carried home when sick or injured (Gn 29:6; Ex 2:16). The care of cattle was also the responsibility of children (1 Sm 16:11). Of necessity, boys were trained in the various arts of war.<\/p>\n<p>Children sometimes joined their fathers in the fields, and their presence was always welcome. From earliest times, boys in particular would watch their fathers until they too picked up a tool or implement to try their skill; girls watched and learned from their mothers. Young children frequently listened to the talk of the elders at the city gates or in the villages. A visit to a sanctuary at festival time was a family affair, furnishing an ideal learning experience. As a child, Jesus accompanied his parents, Mary and Joseph, to the temple in Jerusalem (Lk 2:42-47).<\/p>\n<p>Young girls were surprisingly free to go about their appointed tasks. They were not secluded or veiled and could visit uninhibited with friends and neighbors (Gn 34:1). They were also able to converse with men without embarrassment (24:15-25; 29:11-12; 1 Sm 9:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>Mealtimes were strictly family times. It is doubtful whether a meal comparable to a breakfast was eaten, and a farmer would probably have a light lunch in the fields. The main meal of the day was prepared by the mother, and it would be eaten in the early evening. Although the variety of food available was limited, its preparation was time-consuming.<\/p>\n<p>Feast times were periods of great religious significance and were also the days when family members participated in the symbolic rituals of their faith. Among the Israelites several kinds of food were fundamental to their religious ritual. Family unity and the national religion were molded together by special meals in the home.<\/p>\n<p>Daylight played an important part in the daily habits of the people in antiquity. Although oil lamps were readily available in later periods, it was customary to rise with the sun and go to bed relatively soon after dark. The wife would probably be up before sunrise and might continue her labor after dark.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InNewTestamentTimes\">In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, for those who followed the Greek and Roman style, life became more elegant. Despite that, the status of many family members did not change substantially. Wealthier families had more slaves, and the children were more likely to have formal education, sometimes spending less effort on family chores. Even in Roman times, however, the father still had a legal right to accept or reject his child.<\/p>\n<p>The status of the woman had definitely improved by the NT period. A Roman matron was highly respected and exerted a strong influence over her husband. She was not sequestered in a particular section of the house, as a Greek woman was, but managed and supervised tasks in any part of her home. She helped her husband in business, had her own place in theaters, games, and religious festivals, and sometimes managed her own property. Palestinian women began to enjoy a new status and dignity as the result of Jesus’ attitude toward women and its influence on the early Christian church.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Education; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Sex, Sexuality; Widow; Woman.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refer to setting up a separate dwelling as well as establishing a family. In the broader sense, “house” may refer to an entire nation (“house of Israel”). The heads of families returning from Babylon in the postexilic period controlled sometimes several hundred family members (Ezr 8:1-14). The family was a smaller part of a clan and tribe. In nomadic times the responsibilities and allegiances centered on the larger family group.<\/p>\n<p>Those who belonged to the clan knew that they had to work for common interests and accept responsibility for the whole group. All members of the family were to be protected and assisted in time of need.<\/p>\n<p>As the life of the Israelites became more settled, families (in the wider sense of the term) lived in villages surrounded by fields of wheat, barley, and flax, with areas of grazing land for sheep and goats. Each group of villages consisted of an intermarried, interdependent family group, such as that of the Danites of Zorah and Eshtaol (Jgs 18:11). The hard life of those days demanded a sharing of work and the loyal cooperation of the entire family for survival.<\/p>\n<p>As crafts and trades developed, along with a more sedentary lifestyle, sons learned their fathers’ skills and continued the family trade. Consequently, the whole village might follow a particular craft (1 Chr 4:14; Neh 11:35). By specializing in such trades, however, the villagers became less self-sufficient, depending more on farmers for food and on other specialized villages for the production of cloth or pottery (1 Chr 4:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>With the growth of cities, related groups lived together in specific areas. Many members of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah were listed in the census of Jerusalem by Nehemiah (Neh 11:4-8), and by the writer of Chronicles (1 Chr 9:3-9). One consequence of life in the cities was the fragmentation of the family group. As the bonds of the wider family were loosened, the unit consisted increasingly of a husband and wife with their children, living in one house. The size of houses that have been excavated precludes the idea of any larger family unit as the norm in OT societies.<\/p>\n<p>During the kingdom period, King David’s sons Amnon and Absalom set up their own separate houses (2 Sm 13:7-8, 20). At that time there were few slaves in Hebrew society, but they also were considered members of the family. As bonds of the wider family loosened, and the master of the household lost a degree of authority, the society became one in which the king was sovereign and all the people were his subjects.<\/p>\n<p>The early kings of Israel promoted such a change in order to establish a central ruling authority for the entire country. The king’s subjects fell broadly into the categories of employers and employees, corresponding to the rich and poor of society. By the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, members of the wider family no longer worked for the communal good under the authority of the clan’s head; rather, individuals worked primarily for the good of their own immediate family. Hence one’s labor and devotion were focused more narrowly, and the greatest beneficiary was the king, the personal symbol of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>Emphasis on the smaller family unit increased, and old duties that had been willingly accepted by the wider groups in former times came to be neglected. People did not always help relatives in times of need, and they frequently had to be reminded of their obligations, particularly toward widows and orphans (Is 1:17; Jer 7:6). Family feuds also declined because members no longer felt responsible to take vengeance as a way to uphold the honor of the clan (2 Sm 3:27; 16:8; 2 Kgs 9:26). Nevertheless, Nehemiah expected Israelites to fight for their family honor (Neh 4:14). In NT times, the family was such a unit that it could be sold for a debt incurred by one of its members (Mt 18:25).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew religion’s emphasis on family participation in certain celebrations strengthened the small unit. The Passover, for example, was always celebrated as a family thanksgiving meal (Ex 12:3-4, 46). The prophet Samuel’s parents made a traditional annual pilgrimage to the shrine at Shiloh (1 Sm 2:19). In modern times, a young Jewish boy’s arrival at the threshold of manhood is celebrated with the Bar Mitzvah ceremony. Being so honored in the midst of a religious family preserves the ancient Hebrew tradition of family participation in religious ceremonies.<\/p>\n<p>In his preaching Jesus used the family as a symbol for the relationship of God to his people (Mt 19:14; 23:9; Lk 8:21). From the cross he handed over responsibility for the care of his mother to his disciple John (Jn 19:27).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times, the communion meals in the Jerusalem church took place by households (Acts 2:46). Early Christian meetings were held in the homes of believers because of opposition by the authorities. The book of Acts contains examples of entire families being converted to Christianity (Acts 10:24, 44-48; 16:15, 31-32). Timothy learned the gospel from his grandmother and mother (2 Tm 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>• Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>• Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>• The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>• Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>• In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"StatusofFamilyMembers\">Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>From nomadic times, a father’s authority held the family group together in their encampment, and he became the symbol of their security. In ancient patriarchal societies, the father was an absolute master who had the power of life and death over family members, ruling with unchallenged authority. Although he had extensive responsibilities for those under his care, his power was awesome and his status unquestioned.<\/p>\n<p>A man’s possessions included his wife, servants, slaves, and animals (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). In fact, the phrase “to marry a wife” comes from a Hebrew root meaning “to become the master of a wife.” A husband was as much the master of his wife as he was of his home or his fields. Consequently, the wife addressed him in a subservient manner, as a slave would address a master (Gn 18:12; Jgs 19:26). This low status for a woman extended to a daughter’s position in the ancient household. Females were always under the authority of a male relative: first, the father; then a husband. If a woman became a widow, she was subject to her husband’s nearest male relative, who became her “redeemer.” The bride price (Gn 29:18, 27; Ex 22:16-17; 1 Sm 18:25; 2 Sm 3:14) paid by her husband was not exactly a purchase of the woman from her father, but the exchange of money did stigmatize her. The amount of a bride price depended on the father’s status (Gn 34:12). The usual price was probably 20 to 30 shekels of silver. The bride received gifts of jewelry, ornaments, and clothing from her future husband, and she occasionally enjoyed some sort of financial or material return from the bride price for her own use (Jos 15:19; Jgs 1:15). When her father or husband died, the money frequently reverted to her.<\/p>\n<p>An engaged woman was considered her fiancé’s property just as much as if she were already married to him (Dt 22:23-27). The woman left her own family at marriage, to live with and become part of her new husband’s family. Normally, any succeeding marriages would be with members of that family.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the low legal status of the mother of the family, her life was not as bad as one might suppose. She was the legal wife, not an unpaid servant, and she frequently took a strong role as adviser to her husband in family affairs. Her most important function, aside from childbearing, was organization of the household, of which she was generally the respected manager. Even though the wife might have been acquired through capture in war (Dt 21:10-14), she could not be sold as a slave or daughter could (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5).<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, her position was precarious, in that she could be disowned or divorced by her husband as the result of a simple renunciation: “She is no longer my wife, and I am no longer her husband.” Perhaps he had found fault with her culinary skills, or possibly he was casting his eyes on another woman. In any event, a husband knew that if his wife did not obey even a signal or a glance, he was within his rights to obtain a divorce (cf. Ecclus 25:26). The wife, however, obtained a certain degree of protection in the letter of repudiation, by which her freedom was formally restored. Under Jewish tradition, a wife could not divorce her husband.<\/p>\n<p>In matters of domestic protocol, the Hebrew wife was not introduced to her husband’s guests, a tradition that subsequently led to considerable embarrassment for Abraham’s wife, Sarah, and for Rebekah (Gn 20:16). A woman normally remained veiled in public (24:65; 38:14; Is 47:2).<\/p>\n<p>The imagery in Proverbs 19:13 and 27:15 draws a vigorous comparison between a contentious woman and water dripping from a leaky roof. The OT leaves little doubt about the type of behavior expected from a woman. She was expected to be charming, soft-spoken, discreet, and calm (Prv 9:13; 11:16, 22; 21:9). She was also to be responsible, well-organized, intelligent, thoughtful, reverent, and a good manager of both the household and the family purse (31:10-31). A woman should also be pious and beautiful, and in NT tradition, submissive to her husband, as befitted a woman adorned with the priceless jewel of a gentle and quiet spirit (Ti 2:4-5; 1 Pt 3:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The actions of a few women whose roles in life do not seem to fit the pattern of the meek, passive female pictured above, are recorded in the Bible and the Apocrypha. The books of Judith and Esther recount heroic tales of how national fortunes were saved by women. Deborah and Jael were renowned heroines (Jgs 4–5), and the kingdom of Judah was ruled by a vicious woman, Athaliah, for several years (2 Kgs 11). The women who stepped to the forefront of public life were exceptional and few in number. Judith was a rich widow, an unusual thing in Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MaritalSecurity\">Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>The security of a wife’s position improved considerably when she produced her first child, particularly if it was a son. A woman’s primary duty to her husband and his family was procreation (Gn 1:28; 9:1), and until she gave birth to a son, she feared displacement by a second wife or a concubine. Polygamous marriages were by no means rare, especially in wealthy families. They resulted in two ill-defined family groups, controlled by the mothers but under the overall authority of fathers; there were inevitable jealousies and frictions.<\/p>\n<p>The legal status of a woman was consistently poor in Bible times. With no evidence at all, a husband could accuse his wife of adultery, and she was compelled to face a trial by ordeal. She had to abase herself by taking an oath, eating dust and a cereal offering, and drinking bitter water. A priest, meanwhile, made pronouncements regarding the dire results that would come to her if she were guilty: she would become an outcast with no hope of survival. But if she maintained her serenity, and if her thigh did not rot nor her abdomen swell, she was considered to have “proved” her innocence. In such an event she would go free, and her husband bore no blame whatsoever for his false accusation (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a woman took a vow, it was legal only as long as her father or husband approved it. If she became a widow, the vow still remained in force and could be used against her (Nm 30:3-15).<\/p>\n<p>A woman in Israel was always under the protection of a male, be it her father, grandfather, great-grandfather, brother, husband, or some other member of her husband’s family. She had few legal rights and, in contrast to Babylonian traditions, could not inherit at her husband’s death. It is small wonder that widows were classed with orphans and the poor. A childless widow could on occasion return to her father’s family (Gn 38:11; Lv 22:13; Ru 1:8), thus becoming subject again to the authority of her father. A Hebrew widow could also remain with her late husband’s family. She would then come under the protection of her “redeemer,” a male relative of her husband’s family who assumed responsibility for her. If a husband died leaving a woman childless, it was the responsibility of the husband’s brother to marry her. The first son born of such a union was then regarded as the heir of the first husband.<\/p>\n<p>It was normal for a brother to accept the obligation for such a marriage (levirate). It could be refused on various grounds, but such refusal was considered dishonorable, for it was a man’s duty to perpetuate his brother’s name and to safeguard the family fortune.<\/p>\n<p>A redeemer’s responsibilities were considerable. In addition to the marriage, he was perhaps involved in avenging the family reputation, and he had to ensure that family property increased and remained within family control.<\/p>\n<p>If an Israelite fell into debt and was forced to sell himself into slavery, he would normally be “redeemed” by one of his relatives (Lv 25:47-49). If in his penury an Israelite had to sell his land or his house, the redeemer had the right of first refusal over all other prospective purchasers. It was as much his duty as his right to prevent family property from passing into the hands of strangers (v 25). The prophet Jeremiah bought his cousin Hanamel’s field under similar circumstances (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar OT story of a childless widow, her “redeemer,” and their levirate marriage is recorded in the book of Ruth. One of Naomi’s two sons married Ruth. When Ruth was widowed, her impoverished mother-in-law, Naomi, left her home in Moab and returned to Bethlehem to sell some of the family property. Although a close relative was prepared to buy the land and keep it in the family, he was not ready to marry Ruth as well (Ru 3:12; 4:4). He knew that a son of that union would be deemed a son of the deceased, bearing the dead husband’s name, and thus ultimately inheriting the land (4:4-6). The next relative in order of kinship was Boaz, who became Ruth’s “redeemer.” He was prepared to accept the double obligation of purchasing the land and marrying Ruth (4:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PositionofChildren\">Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>Children were generally well loved, but their childhood was short and they were often regarded as laborers for the house or fields. According to the law of primogeniture, the eldest son received a double portion of the estate as his birthright (Dt 21:17). Thus, he was assured of the position of family head. Even during his father’s lifetime, the eldest son took precedence over his brothers and sisters (Gn 43:33). Where twins were born, the first to emerge from the womb was considered the elder, with all the attendant privileges (25:24-26; 38:27-30).<\/p>\n<p>For a serious offense, the eldest son could lose the right of primogeniture (Gn 35:22; 49:3-4; 1 Chr 5:1), or it could be surrendered voluntarily, as Esau did by selling his birthright to his brother Jacob (Gn 25:29-34). There was a law protecting the eldest son from his father’s favoritism for a younger brother (Dt 21:15-17). Nevertheless, King David gave his kingdom to Solomon, his youngest son (1 Kgs 2:15).<\/p>\n<p>In a family with no sons, a daughter could inherit property (Nm 27:8). Frequently, parents consulted neither sons nor daughters when marriage partners were arranged for them. Marriage was often an alliance or contract between two families, and thus the wishes and concerns of individuals were considered unimportant. Love matches were few, although occasionally a son would marry in defiance of his parents, as Esau did (Gn 26:34-35). Although it was rare for young people to express their feelings and preferences about marriage in an open fashion, Saul’s daughter, Michal, made known her love for David (1 Sm 18:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is no record of legal adoption among the Hebrews, but it was practiced from ancient times in Mesopotamia. It was especially useful as a means of ensuring a childless couple that their land would be tilled and that they would be cared for in their old age. All examples of adoption mentioned in the OT took place outside the land of Israel (Ex 2:10; 1 Kgs 11:20; Est 2:7, 15) and are not examples of true adoption as a lifetime member of a family.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRightsofChildren\">The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>The nature of patriarchal society made for unfortunate distinctions between male and female children. The position of a daughter, who could be sold into slavery or sold to be the concubine of a man and then possibly sold again (Ex 21:7-11), was certainly inferior to that of a son. In the patriarchal period, however, both a son and a daughter could be put to death for disobeying the head of the family. One’s children could also be sacrificed in worship rituals (see Gn 22; Jgs 11). It is probable that infant sacrifice was practiced by nations neighboring Israel, including Canaan and Ammon.<\/p>\n<p>The rights of children were improved considerably with the promulgation of the code of Mosaic law. A father was no longer permitted to put his child to death without referring the case to the elders (Dt 21:18-21). Both sons and daughters could be brought before such authorities and accused of being disobedient, gluttonous, or drunkards. A father’s absolute authority even extended to his married son and family if they were living under his roof. The law also prohibited children from being held responsible for the crimes of their parents (Dt 24:16). In King David’s time a person convicted by the community had the right of appeal to the king (2 Sm 14:4-11).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew families both parents were held in high respect. Honor had to be given to both mother and father (Ex 20:12), and the law condemned offenses against either parent (21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 21:18; 27:16). Respect due to the mother is a recurrent theme in the Wisdom Literature (Prv 19:26; 20:20; cf. Ecclus 3:1-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DailyLifeoftheHebrewFamily\">Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>In the everyday affairs of a Hebrew household, it was the father’s responsibility to maintain the family fortune and to be the provider. He might work in the fields, most probably with crops of flax, barley, or wheat. Or he would work at a trade, possibly as a weaver, builder, potter, dyer, fuller, or a worker in copper or bronze. If he lived near the shore, he might be a fisherman.<\/p>\n<p>The father was also responsible for the religious well-being of the family. It was his duty to take over his sons’ education from the mother at an early age, teaching them the tenets of Hebrew religion (Ex 10:2; 12:26; Dt 4:9; 6:7). He also explained all the facets of the law and the interwoven history of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the disciplinarian of the family, with the rod being used to drive home the lessons taught (Prv 13:24; 22:15; 29:15-17). Though children were loved and valued, they were not pampered (Ecclus 30:9-12). In postexilic times education also took place within the precincts of the synagogue, and shortly before the time of Christ, a general elementary education was introduced. It was also imperative that a father teach his sons a trade, normally his own, for a man without a trade either starved or became a thief. Another important paternal responsibility was to provide wives for male offspring in the household.<\/p>\n<p>The mother was responsible for her sons’ and daughters’ early education (Prv 1:8; 6:20), teaching them religious songs and prayers as soon as they could talk. A father took over the education of his sons, but the mother continued with the daughters, training them to spin, weave, cook, clean, trim the lamps, and generally to become competent in all the household duties (31:13-31).<\/p>\n<p>With little furniture, keeping a house clean meant sweeping the floors to keep them free from dust and dirt. Cooking was at once simple and difficult. It was simple in that much of the food was cooked in the form of a soup or stew, or else made into a cake and cooked on a griddle. It was difficult in that the corn had to be ground by hand and bread was baked daily.<\/p>\n<p>A mother was expected to take wool, card it, spin it, and often weave and make clothes for her family. In addition, she would help her husband in the fields at harvesttime. Because many families had one or more olive trees, a few grapevines, and fig trees, the mother would also assist in picking the fruit. She would sometimes work at the press when the olives or grapes were being processed. Frequently the treading of grapes in the family vat would be done together by husband and wife. Drawing water from the well was considered a menial task and was generally the wife’s responsibility, although sometimes it was assigned to the children (Gn 24:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>As in all societies, there was a time when children laughed and played together (Zec 8:5; Mt 11:16), although childhood and adolescence were not recognized as specific stages of development. Children were considered as sucklings if under three, but were regarded as boys or girls when they were able to take care of themselves. A small child sat on his mother’s lap and was played with (Is 66:12). There is no evidence of organized sports for children. Toys, including whistles, rattles, dolls, and miniature cooking utensils, have been excavated at Palestinian sites.<\/p>\n<p>As soon as a boy was old enough, he took his place in the family and accepted his appointed task. Among other things, children were expected to gather fuel (Jer 7:18). Young boys and girls tended the flocks. The sheep had to be protected from marauding wild beasts, guarded against their own folly when they wandered near crevices, steered toward good pasture and water, and carried home when sick or injured (Gn 29:6; Ex 2:16). The care of cattle was also the responsibility of children (1 Sm 16:11). Of necessity, boys were trained in the various arts of war.<\/p>\n<p>Children sometimes joined their fathers in the fields, and their presence was always welcome. From earliest times, boys in particular would watch their fathers until they too picked up a tool or implement to try their skill; girls watched and learned from their mothers. Young children frequently listened to the talk of the elders at the city gates or in the villages. A visit to a sanctuary at festival time was a family affair, furnishing an ideal learning experience. As a child, Jesus accompanied his parents, Mary and Joseph, to the temple in Jerusalem (Lk 2:42-47).<\/p>\n<p>Young girls were surprisingly free to go about their appointed tasks. They were not secluded or veiled and could visit uninhibited with friends and neighbors (Gn 34:1). They were also able to converse with men without embarrassment (24:15-25; 29:11-12; 1 Sm 9:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>Mealtimes were strictly family times. It is doubtful whether a meal comparable to a breakfast was eaten, and a farmer would probably have a light lunch in the fields. The main meal of the day was prepared by the mother, and it would be eaten in the early evening. Although the variety of food available was limited, its preparation was time-consuming.<\/p>\n<p>Feast times were periods of great religious significance and were also the days when family members participated in the symbolic rituals of their faith. Among the Israelites several kinds of food were fundamental to their religious ritual. Family unity and the national religion were molded together by special meals in the home.<\/p>\n<p>Daylight played an important part in the daily habits of the people in antiquity. Although oil lamps were readily available in later periods, it was customary to rise with the sun and go to bed relatively soon after dark. The wife would probably be up before sunrise and might continue her labor after dark.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InNewTestamentTimes\">In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, for those who followed the Greek and Roman style, life became more elegant. Despite that, the status of many family members did not change substantially. Wealthier families had more slaves, and the children were more likely to have formal education, sometimes spending less effort on family chores. Even in Roman times, however, the father still had a legal right to accept or reject his child.<\/p>\n<p>The status of the woman had definitely improved by the NT period. A Roman matron was highly respected and exerted a strong influence over her husband. She was not sequestered in a particular section of the house, as a Greek woman was, but managed and supervised tasks in any part of her home. She helped her husband in business, had her own place in theaters, games, and religious festivals, and sometimes managed her own property. Palestinian women began to enjoy a new status and dignity as the result of Jesus’ attitude toward women and its influence on the early Christian church.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Education; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Sex, Sexuality; Widow; Woman.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refe...","summary_en":"FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refe...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15178,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hamor","title_en":"Hamor","content_ro":"<h3>HAMOR<\/h3>\n<p>Hivite or Horite prince of the country about Shechem (Gn 34:2), from whom Jacob bought land when returning with his family from Paddan-aram. At this time Hamor’s son Shechem committed fornication with Dinah, the daughter of Jacob. At his son’s request Hamor asked Jacob for a marriage alliance between Shechem and Dinah, offering a dowry. Simeon and Levi, in pretended friendship, persuaded the males of the city to be circumcised, but then attacked and killed them before they were healed, taking revenge for their sister’s humiliation.<\/p>\n<p>“Hamor” is the Hebrew word that Jacob uses to denote Issachar in blessing his sons (Gn 49:14) and is the usual word for “ass” in the OT (e.g., Gn 42:26; Ex 20:17; Jgs 15:15; Is 1:3; Zec 9:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HAMOR<\/h3>\n<p>Hivite or Horite prince of the country about Shechem (Gn 34:2), from whom Jacob bought land when returning with his family from Paddan-aram. At this time Hamor’s son Shechem committed fornication with Dinah, the daughter of Jacob. At his son’s request Hamor asked Jacob for a marriage alliance between Shechem and Dinah, offering a dowry. Simeon and Levi, in pretended friendship, persuaded the males of the city to be circumcised, but then attacked and killed them before they were healed, taking revenge for their sister’s humiliation.<\/p>\n<p>“Hamor” is the Hebrew word that Jacob uses to denote Issachar in blessing his sons (Gn 49:14) and is the usual word for “ass” in the OT (e.g., Gn 42:26; Ex 20:17; Jgs 15:15; Is 1:3; Zec 9:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HAMOR Hivite or Horite prince of the country about Shechem (Gn 34:2), from whom Jacob bought land when returning with his family from Paddan-aram. At this time Hamor’s son Shechem committed fornication with Dinah, the daughter of Jacob. At his son’s request Hamor asked Jacob for a marriage alliance between Shechem and Dinah, offering a dowry. Simeon and Levi, in pretended friendship, persuaded the males of the city to be circumcised, but then attacked and killed them before they were healed, ...","summary_en":"HAMOR Hivite or Horite prince of the country about Shechem (Gn 34:2), from whom Jacob bought land when returning with his family from Paddan-aram. At this time Hamor’s son Shechem committed fornication with Dinah, the daughter of Jacob. At his son’s request Hamor asked Jacob for a marriage alliance between Shechem and Dinah, offering a dowry. Simeon and Levi, in pretended friendship, persuaded the males of the city to be circumcised, but then attacked and killed them before they were healed, ...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24468,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Marriage Customs Marriage","title_en":"Marriage Customs Marriage","content_ro":"<h3>MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS<\/h3>\n<p>The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the early monarchy, it is difficult to be certain about the matter, despite the importance in Egypt, and perhaps elsewhere, of the role of the mother in determining descent.<\/p>\n<p>Generally, the bride left her parents when she married and went to live with her husband’s clan, as Rebekah did (Gn 24:58-59). The phrase “to marry a wife” is from a root meaning to “become master” (Dt 21:13), and the wife frequently treated her husband as, and referred to him as, master.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew genealogical lists indicate that descent was reckoned through the male line (Gn 5:10; 36:9-43; Nm 1:1-15; Ru 4:18-22; 1 Chr 1:1-9). The important right of naming a child, indicating power and authority over that child, was exercised almost equally between father and mother in biblical references (cf. Gn 4:1, 25-26; 5:29; 35:18; 1 Sm 1:20; 4:21; Is 8:3; Hos 1:4-9). Sons were frequently named after their fathers and were identified with them.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the authority figure in the home in a patriarchal society. His wife and children were regarded as his possessions in somewhat the same way as his fields and livestock (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). He had the right to sell his daughters (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5), and even had the power of life and death over his children.<\/p>\n<p>The ease with which a man could terminate a marriage by divorcing his wife also shows the measure of his authority in the family (Dt 24:1-4; cf. 22:13-21).<\/p>\n<p>A levirate marriage was instituted to preserve a family name and inheritance. When a man died, the responsibility for maintaining his widow and any children that she might have fell upon her husband’s closest male relative. The order of responsibility is set out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. Normally, the brother of the deceased husband living with the clan was expected to enter into a levirate marriage with the widow. If she was childless, the firstborn of the new marriage was regarded as a child of the deceased. Levirate marriage was also known to the Canaanites, Assyrians, and Hittites.<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar levirate situation in the OT, although not conforming strictly to the law of Deuteronomy 25, is described in the book of Ruth. It was essential for Ruth to find some close male relative to marry her so that the family name and property could be preserved. The closest male relative declined the responsibility, feeling that it was a double imposition, first, to have to purchase the land and support Ruth, and second, to know that the first son would be regarded as her dead husband’s child, bearing his name and inheriting the land. Boaz agreed to undertake the responsibility (Ru 2:20–4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite numerous examples of polygamy cited in the OT, there is no doubt that the vast majority of the Israelites were monogamous. There are no examples given of large polygamous marriages in the families of commoners.<\/p>\n<p>The original instruction to Adam was that a “man . . . cleaves to his wife” (Gn 2:24). Hebrew laws generally imply that a marriage with one wife is the most acceptable form of marriage (Ex 20:17; 21:5; Lv 18:8, 16-20; 20:10; Nm 5:12; Dt 5:21). Although this seems to have become the norm by the time of the monarchy, a king such as Solomon did not follow Hebrew traditions in this matter. In the postexilic period marriages were predominantly monogamous, although they were being terminated increasingly by divorce. In the NT period monogamy seems to have been the rule, although persons such as Herod the Great were polygamous. Christ taught that marriage should last the lifetime of the partners, and if a man divorced his wife and married another woman during his previous spouse’s lifetime, he committed adultery (Mt 5:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage generally took place with those who were close to the immediate family circle, and it was imperative, therefore, that limits on acceptable consanguinity should be imposed. In patriarchal times a man could marry his half sister on his father’s side (Gn 20:12), and this continued to be the case even under David (2 Sm 13:13), although it was specifically forbidden in Leviticus 20:17. As there is some contradiction between the marriage laws of Deuteronomy and those in the Law of Holiness (Dt 25:5; Lv 18:16), it is possible that there was some modification of the stricter Levitical regulations. Marriages between cousins, such as Isaac with Rebekah, and Jacob with Rachel and Leah, were common. When a close relative was interested in marriage, it was almost impossible to refuse (Tb 6:13; 7:11-12). Moses was the offspring of a marriage between nephew and aunt (Ex 6:20; Nm 26:59), which would have been forbidden in Leviticus 18:12-13 and 20:19, as would Jacob’s marriage with two sisters at the same time (Gn 29:30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites settled in Canaan, many of them married Canaanite women, much to the consternation of those who desired to maintain the purity of the Hebrew religion (1 Kgs 11:4). Such intermarriage was prohibited under Mosaic law (Ex 34:15-16; Dt 7:3-4), although many Israelites ignored these regulations and continued to indulge in mixed marriages. If a woman was captured in war and was prepared to abandon her native country, an exception could be made (Dt 21:10-14). By contrast, Samson married a Philistine woman who remained with her own people, but who received conjugal visits from her husband periodically (Jgs 14:8–15:2).<\/p>\n<p>The danger of intermarriage affecting the purity of Hebrew religion was considered so great that in the postexilic period wholesale divorce was ordered where Jews had married foreign wives (Ezr 9:2; 10:3, 16-17). The intent was that the national religion should remain pure, even though homes and families were destroyed. Even in NT times, Paul denounced marriage with non-Christians (2 Cor 6:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to estimate at what age young people married. A boy was considered to be a man by his early teens, and late in Jewish tradition this transition was celebrated by the bar mitzvah, which generally occurred when the boy was 13.<\/p>\n<p>Normally the young man’s parents chose the bride. The resulting discussion about the marriage occurred between the groom’s parents and the bride’s parents, and often neither of the young people was consulted. It was not essential for the eldest in the family to be married first (Gn 29:26). When Abraham decided that Isaac should be married, a servant was sent to choose a bride from among Abraham’s relatives in Mesopotamia. The servant made contact with the bride’s brother and mother (24:33-53), and it was only afterward that Rebekah was asked to give her consent (vv 57-58). Her father was possibly incapacitated; otherwise, it would have been unlikely that her consent would have been asked at all.<\/p>\n<p>One of the reasons why the average young man would not have been able to afford more than one wife was the practice of the bride-price, which had to be paid to the bride’s father. It was possible to substitute service for the bride-price (Gn 29:15-30), or the completion of an appointed task (1 Sm 18:25-27). A specific sum is mentioned for the bride-price in the case of a virgin who had been raped and who had to be purchased by her seducer. The price was set at 50 shekels, but this was considered to be a punishment; it is probable that the normal amount was between 10 and 320 shekels (Lv 27:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the second temple, a virgin bride was considered to be worth 50 shekels, and a widow or divorced woman about half that sum. During this period, a virgin bride was normally married in midweek so that, if her husband found her not to be a virgin, he could bring proof to the court the following day, which would still be in advance of the Sabbath. A widow or a divorced woman normally married on the equivalent of a Thursday, giving her a full day with her husband before the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>Marriage was a covenant or alliance between two families. It thus united them, and by extending the kinship, the overall size of the group was increased. This was important in a society where responsibilities for relatives, however distant, were accepted unhesitatingly. The covenant concept also could have political overtones, as with the marriage between Solomon and the Egyptian princess (1 Kgs 11:1) or Ahab of Israel and Jezebel of Tyre (16:31).<\/p>\n<p>The sealing of the covenant included the transfer of gifts, which would establish the wealth and status of the donor and of the bride (Gn 34:12). In the ancient Near East, the giving of a gift was thought to include a part of the donor, so that the giver was actually offering a portion of himself. The gift that sealed the covenant also established the donor’s authority over the bride.<\/p>\n<p>The next stage in the marriage procedure was the betrothal. First mentioned in Exodus 22:16, the term is used several times in Deuteronomy (Dt 20:7; 22:23-24). The betrothal had the legal status of a marriage (Dt 28:30; 2 Sm 3:14), and anyone violating a betrothed virgin would be stoned, according to the law of Deuteronomy, for violating his neighbor’s “wife” (Dt 22:23-24). The meaning of a betrothal involved taking possession, in a manner similar to that of receiving tribute. Nevertheless, there remained a distinction between betrothing a woman and taking her as a wife (20:7). During the period of betrothal, the prospective groom was exempt from military service. It was assumed that the betrothal was a formal part of a permanent relationship (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:27; 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>A man who was to marry another’s daughter was already regarded as a son-in-law at the time of betrothal (Gn 19:14). Mary, as Joseph’s betrothed, was actually considered his wife, although he did not have intercourse with her until after the birth of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The first biblical record of a wedding being celebrated by a feast is in the story of Jacob (Gn 29:22). There was no actual marriage contract recorded until its mention in the book of Tobit (Tb 7:12). This contract was not considered valid until the couple had cohabited for a week (Gn 29:27; Jgs 14:12, 18). When Samson left his bride before the end of the seven-day period, the bride’s parents considered the marriage void and gave her to another man (Jgs 14:20).<\/p>\n<p>The wedding was an occasion of great family rejoicing. The special clothing of the bride and groom (Is 61:10; Ez 16:9-13) included for the bride a fine dress often adorned with jewels (Ps 45:14-15; Is 61:10) and other ornaments, while the bridegroom had fine clothing and wore a diadem (Sg 3:11; Is 61:10). The bride wore a veil (Gn 24:65; Sg 4:3), which was removed in the bridal chamber. This would account for Rebekah’s need to veil herself in the presence of Isaac, her fiancé (Gn 24:65), and also for the ease with which Laban was able to replace Rachel with Leah on Jacob’s wedding night (29:23-25).<\/p>\n<p>Symbolic ceremonies may sometimes have been included as part of the betrothal or wedding ceremonies, such as Ruth’s request that Boaz spread his skirt over her to indicate that he was taking her to wife (Ru 3:9). Another ritual may have been the ceremonial removal of the bride’s girdle by the groom in the nuptial chamber, which was a room or tent specially prepared for the newly married couple. The marriage was normally consummated on the first night (Gn 29:23; Tb 8:1), and the stained linen would be retained as evidence of the bride’s virginity.<\/p>\n<p>In a contrast to the elaborate procession and feasting of the marriage, divorce was simple. A man could divorce his wife if he found fault with her in any particular matter, and this right was not abolished until the 11th century <span>AD<\/span>. Divorce was discouraged, however, and gradually the procedure became more complex, being hedged about with a number of deterrents.<\/p>\n<p>As the laws regarding divorce became more complex, so the procedure became increasingly expensive. At a later time a lawyer, or sometimes a rabbi, would give advice, especially on such matters as the return of property rightly belonging to the bride or her family.<\/p>\n<p>If a bride was found to have committed adultery, the husband was thought to be entitled to a divorce. This was also the case if he even suspected her of infidelity. He could also divorce his wife if he felt that she had violated normal morality, had become apostate, or had been less than efficient in the management of her household. If a woman refused her husband his conjugal rights for a period of at least one year, she could be divorced. Other grounds for divorcing a wife included insulting behavior to a husband or his relatives, contracting an incurable disease, or refusing to accompany her husband when he moved the domicile to a new area.<\/p>\n<p>In general, the status of the wife was low. Despite the fact that she gave advice, managed the household, educated the young children, and worked alongside her husband when necessary, he was still her master, and her role was to obey. She was little more than a servant, although better than a slave, for she could not be sold even though she could be divorced.<\/p>\n<p>In the frequent figurative uses of marriage in the OT, the Hebrew people and God are referred to in terms of bride and bridegroom (Is 62:4-5; Jer 2:2). The desolation that is about to overtake Judah is contrasted by Jeremiah with the celebration of a wedding feast (Jer 7:34; 16:9; 25:10). Figurative forms are used again in Hosea, where God rejects the relationship with his wife, Israel (Hos 2:2), but is prepared to accept her again if she resumes her faithful practices (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist compares his sense of joy with that of a friend of the groom at a wedding (Jn 3:29), while Jesus himself made reference to the wedding preparations in the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-12). In the story of the marriage feast (22:1-14) Christ mentions quite incidentally the fact that wedding robes were provided for the guests at such ceremonies. The theme of the Christian church as the bride of Christ occurs in such books as 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusTeachingsonMarriageandAdultery\">Jesus’ Teachings on Marriage and Adultery<\/p>\n<p>In the realm of civil law there are changes of emphasis in Jesus’ teaching over against the OT. For example, the OT did not regard infidelity by a husband as adultery against his wife. When challenged by the Jews, Jesus said that originally God had made one wife for a man; therefore, there should be no divorce (Mk 10:2-9). Further, he stated if a man does divorce his wife and marry again, he “commits adultery against her” (v 11). Thus, Jesus made man and woman equal as regards adultery. An unfaithful husband is just as adulterous as an unfaithful wife. This revolutionary teaching struck the disciples as severe (see Mt 19:10), but it illustrates what Jesus meant when he said their righteousness must be greater than that of the Jewish leaders (5:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is a slight difference in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ teaching, which has led some scholars to argue that Jesus was not quite as strict as the above summary suggests. According to Matthew 19:9, a wife’s “unchastity” (probably some sexual misconduct) allows an aggrieved husband to divorce her and marry again. If this remark concluded the passage, this interpretation would be the simplest. However, from the context it is more likely that Jesus allowed innocent spouses to separate from their wives but not to remarry. This explains why the disciples were so shocked and why Jesus went on to speak about some who refuse to marry for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 19:12). This was also the way the church interpreted the passage for the first five centuries. They allowed Christians to separate but not to remarry (cf. 1 Cor 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adultery; Civil Law and Justice; Concubinage, Concubines; Divorce; Family Life and Relations; Sex, Sexuality; Virgin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS<\/h3>\n<p>The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the early monarchy, it is difficult to be certain about the matter, despite the importance in Egypt, and perhaps elsewhere, of the role of the mother in determining descent.<\/p>\n<p>Generally, the bride left her parents when she married and went to live with her husband’s clan, as Rebekah did (Gn 24:58-59). The phrase “to marry a wife” is from a root meaning to “become master” (Dt 21:13), and the wife frequently treated her husband as, and referred to him as, master.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew genealogical lists indicate that descent was reckoned through the male line (Gn 5:10; 36:9-43; Nm 1:1-15; Ru 4:18-22; 1 Chr 1:1-9). The important right of naming a child, indicating power and authority over that child, was exercised almost equally between father and mother in biblical references (cf. Gn 4:1, 25-26; 5:29; 35:18; 1 Sm 1:20; 4:21; Is 8:3; Hos 1:4-9). Sons were frequently named after their fathers and were identified with them.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the authority figure in the home in a patriarchal society. His wife and children were regarded as his possessions in somewhat the same way as his fields and livestock (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). He had the right to sell his daughters (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5), and even had the power of life and death over his children.<\/p>\n<p>The ease with which a man could terminate a marriage by divorcing his wife also shows the measure of his authority in the family (Dt 24:1-4; cf. 22:13-21).<\/p>\n<p>A levirate marriage was instituted to preserve a family name and inheritance. When a man died, the responsibility for maintaining his widow and any children that she might have fell upon her husband’s closest male relative. The order of responsibility is set out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. Normally, the brother of the deceased husband living with the clan was expected to enter into a levirate marriage with the widow. If she was childless, the firstborn of the new marriage was regarded as a child of the deceased. Levirate marriage was also known to the Canaanites, Assyrians, and Hittites.<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar levirate situation in the OT, although not conforming strictly to the law of Deuteronomy 25, is described in the book of Ruth. It was essential for Ruth to find some close male relative to marry her so that the family name and property could be preserved. The closest male relative declined the responsibility, feeling that it was a double imposition, first, to have to purchase the land and support Ruth, and second, to know that the first son would be regarded as her dead husband’s child, bearing his name and inheriting the land. Boaz agreed to undertake the responsibility (Ru 2:20–4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite numerous examples of polygamy cited in the OT, there is no doubt that the vast majority of the Israelites were monogamous. There are no examples given of large polygamous marriages in the families of commoners.<\/p>\n<p>The original instruction to Adam was that a “man . . . cleaves to his wife” (Gn 2:24). Hebrew laws generally imply that a marriage with one wife is the most acceptable form of marriage (Ex 20:17; 21:5; Lv 18:8, 16-20; 20:10; Nm 5:12; Dt 5:21). Although this seems to have become the norm by the time of the monarchy, a king such as Solomon did not follow Hebrew traditions in this matter. In the postexilic period marriages were predominantly monogamous, although they were being terminated increasingly by divorce. In the NT period monogamy seems to have been the rule, although persons such as Herod the Great were polygamous. Christ taught that marriage should last the lifetime of the partners, and if a man divorced his wife and married another woman during his previous spouse’s lifetime, he committed adultery (Mt 5:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage generally took place with those who were close to the immediate family circle, and it was imperative, therefore, that limits on acceptable consanguinity should be imposed. In patriarchal times a man could marry his half sister on his father’s side (Gn 20:12), and this continued to be the case even under David (2 Sm 13:13), although it was specifically forbidden in Leviticus 20:17. As there is some contradiction between the marriage laws of Deuteronomy and those in the Law of Holiness (Dt 25:5; Lv 18:16), it is possible that there was some modification of the stricter Levitical regulations. Marriages between cousins, such as Isaac with Rebekah, and Jacob with Rachel and Leah, were common. When a close relative was interested in marriage, it was almost impossible to refuse (Tb 6:13; 7:11-12). Moses was the offspring of a marriage between nephew and aunt (Ex 6:20; Nm 26:59), which would have been forbidden in Leviticus 18:12-13 and 20:19, as would Jacob’s marriage with two sisters at the same time (Gn 29:30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites settled in Canaan, many of them married Canaanite women, much to the consternation of those who desired to maintain the purity of the Hebrew religion (1 Kgs 11:4). Such intermarriage was prohibited under Mosaic law (Ex 34:15-16; Dt 7:3-4), although many Israelites ignored these regulations and continued to indulge in mixed marriages. If a woman was captured in war and was prepared to abandon her native country, an exception could be made (Dt 21:10-14). By contrast, Samson married a Philistine woman who remained with her own people, but who received conjugal visits from her husband periodically (Jgs 14:8–15:2).<\/p>\n<p>The danger of intermarriage affecting the purity of Hebrew religion was considered so great that in the postexilic period wholesale divorce was ordered where Jews had married foreign wives (Ezr 9:2; 10:3, 16-17). The intent was that the national religion should remain pure, even though homes and families were destroyed. Even in NT times, Paul denounced marriage with non-Christians (2 Cor 6:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to estimate at what age young people married. A boy was considered to be a man by his early teens, and late in Jewish tradition this transition was celebrated by the bar mitzvah, which generally occurred when the boy was 13.<\/p>\n<p>Normally the young man’s parents chose the bride. The resulting discussion about the marriage occurred between the groom’s parents and the bride’s parents, and often neither of the young people was consulted. It was not essential for the eldest in the family to be married first (Gn 29:26). When Abraham decided that Isaac should be married, a servant was sent to choose a bride from among Abraham’s relatives in Mesopotamia. The servant made contact with the bride’s brother and mother (24:33-53), and it was only afterward that Rebekah was asked to give her consent (vv 57-58). Her father was possibly incapacitated; otherwise, it would have been unlikely that her consent would have been asked at all.<\/p>\n<p>One of the reasons why the average young man would not have been able to afford more than one wife was the practice of the bride-price, which had to be paid to the bride’s father. It was possible to substitute service for the bride-price (Gn 29:15-30), or the completion of an appointed task (1 Sm 18:25-27). A specific sum is mentioned for the bride-price in the case of a virgin who had been raped and who had to be purchased by her seducer. The price was set at 50 shekels, but this was considered to be a punishment; it is probable that the normal amount was between 10 and 320 shekels (Lv 27:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the second temple, a virgin bride was considered to be worth 50 shekels, and a widow or divorced woman about half that sum. During this period, a virgin bride was normally married in midweek so that, if her husband found her not to be a virgin, he could bring proof to the court the following day, which would still be in advance of the Sabbath. A widow or a divorced woman normally married on the equivalent of a Thursday, giving her a full day with her husband before the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>Marriage was a covenant or alliance between two families. It thus united them, and by extending the kinship, the overall size of the group was increased. This was important in a society where responsibilities for relatives, however distant, were accepted unhesitatingly. The covenant concept also could have political overtones, as with the marriage between Solomon and the Egyptian princess (1 Kgs 11:1) or Ahab of Israel and Jezebel of Tyre (16:31).<\/p>\n<p>The sealing of the covenant included the transfer of gifts, which would establish the wealth and status of the donor and of the bride (Gn 34:12). In the ancient Near East, the giving of a gift was thought to include a part of the donor, so that the giver was actually offering a portion of himself. The gift that sealed the covenant also established the donor’s authority over the bride.<\/p>\n<p>The next stage in the marriage procedure was the betrothal. First mentioned in Exodus 22:16, the term is used several times in Deuteronomy (Dt 20:7; 22:23-24). The betrothal had the legal status of a marriage (Dt 28:30; 2 Sm 3:14), and anyone violating a betrothed virgin would be stoned, according to the law of Deuteronomy, for violating his neighbor’s “wife” (Dt 22:23-24). The meaning of a betrothal involved taking possession, in a manner similar to that of receiving tribute. Nevertheless, there remained a distinction between betrothing a woman and taking her as a wife (20:7). During the period of betrothal, the prospective groom was exempt from military service. It was assumed that the betrothal was a formal part of a permanent relationship (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:27; 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>A man who was to marry another’s daughter was already regarded as a son-in-law at the time of betrothal (Gn 19:14). Mary, as Joseph’s betrothed, was actually considered his wife, although he did not have intercourse with her until after the birth of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The first biblical record of a wedding being celebrated by a feast is in the story of Jacob (Gn 29:22). There was no actual marriage contract recorded until its mention in the book of Tobit (Tb 7:12). This contract was not considered valid until the couple had cohabited for a week (Gn 29:27; Jgs 14:12, 18). When Samson left his bride before the end of the seven-day period, the bride’s parents considered the marriage void and gave her to another man (Jgs 14:20).<\/p>\n<p>The wedding was an occasion of great family rejoicing. The special clothing of the bride and groom (Is 61:10; Ez 16:9-13) included for the bride a fine dress often adorned with jewels (Ps 45:14-15; Is 61:10) and other ornaments, while the bridegroom had fine clothing and wore a diadem (Sg 3:11; Is 61:10). The bride wore a veil (Gn 24:65; Sg 4:3), which was removed in the bridal chamber. This would account for Rebekah’s need to veil herself in the presence of Isaac, her fiancé (Gn 24:65), and also for the ease with which Laban was able to replace Rachel with Leah on Jacob’s wedding night (29:23-25).<\/p>\n<p>Symbolic ceremonies may sometimes have been included as part of the betrothal or wedding ceremonies, such as Ruth’s request that Boaz spread his skirt over her to indicate that he was taking her to wife (Ru 3:9). Another ritual may have been the ceremonial removal of the bride’s girdle by the groom in the nuptial chamber, which was a room or tent specially prepared for the newly married couple. The marriage was normally consummated on the first night (Gn 29:23; Tb 8:1), and the stained linen would be retained as evidence of the bride’s virginity.<\/p>\n<p>In a contrast to the elaborate procession and feasting of the marriage, divorce was simple. A man could divorce his wife if he found fault with her in any particular matter, and this right was not abolished until the 11th century <span>AD<\/span>. Divorce was discouraged, however, and gradually the procedure became more complex, being hedged about with a number of deterrents.<\/p>\n<p>As the laws regarding divorce became more complex, so the procedure became increasingly expensive. At a later time a lawyer, or sometimes a rabbi, would give advice, especially on such matters as the return of property rightly belonging to the bride or her family.<\/p>\n<p>If a bride was found to have committed adultery, the husband was thought to be entitled to a divorce. This was also the case if he even suspected her of infidelity. He could also divorce his wife if he felt that she had violated normal morality, had become apostate, or had been less than efficient in the management of her household. If a woman refused her husband his conjugal rights for a period of at least one year, she could be divorced. Other grounds for divorcing a wife included insulting behavior to a husband or his relatives, contracting an incurable disease, or refusing to accompany her husband when he moved the domicile to a new area.<\/p>\n<p>In general, the status of the wife was low. Despite the fact that she gave advice, managed the household, educated the young children, and worked alongside her husband when necessary, he was still her master, and her role was to obey. She was little more than a servant, although better than a slave, for she could not be sold even though she could be divorced.<\/p>\n<p>In the frequent figurative uses of marriage in the OT, the Hebrew people and God are referred to in terms of bride and bridegroom (Is 62:4-5; Jer 2:2). The desolation that is about to overtake Judah is contrasted by Jeremiah with the celebration of a wedding feast (Jer 7:34; 16:9; 25:10). Figurative forms are used again in Hosea, where God rejects the relationship with his wife, Israel (Hos 2:2), but is prepared to accept her again if she resumes her faithful practices (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist compares his sense of joy with that of a friend of the groom at a wedding (Jn 3:29), while Jesus himself made reference to the wedding preparations in the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-12). In the story of the marriage feast (22:1-14) Christ mentions quite incidentally the fact that wedding robes were provided for the guests at such ceremonies. The theme of the Christian church as the bride of Christ occurs in such books as 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusTeachingsonMarriageandAdultery\">Jesus’ Teachings on Marriage and Adultery<\/p>\n<p>In the realm of civil law there are changes of emphasis in Jesus’ teaching over against the OT. For example, the OT did not regard infidelity by a husband as adultery against his wife. When challenged by the Jews, Jesus said that originally God had made one wife for a man; therefore, there should be no divorce (Mk 10:2-9). Further, he stated if a man does divorce his wife and marry again, he “commits adultery against her” (v 11). Thus, Jesus made man and woman equal as regards adultery. An unfaithful husband is just as adulterous as an unfaithful wife. This revolutionary teaching struck the disciples as severe (see Mt 19:10), but it illustrates what Jesus meant when he said their righteousness must be greater than that of the Jewish leaders (5:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is a slight difference in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ teaching, which has led some scholars to argue that Jesus was not quite as strict as the above summary suggests. According to Matthew 19:9, a wife’s “unchastity” (probably some sexual misconduct) allows an aggrieved husband to divorce her and marry again. If this remark concluded the passage, this interpretation would be the simplest. However, from the context it is more likely that Jesus allowed innocent spouses to separate from their wives but not to remarry. This explains why the disciples were so shocked and why Jesus went on to speak about some who refuse to marry for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 19:12). This was also the way the church interpreted the passage for the first five centuries. They allowed Christians to separate but not to remarry (cf. 1 Cor 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adultery; Civil Law and Justice; Concubinage, Concubines; Divorce; Family Life and Relations; Sex, Sexuality; Virgin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures. The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24). Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the...","summary_en":"MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures. The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24). Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27264,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Neighbor","title_en":"Neighbor","content_ro":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\n<p>Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\n<p>Within the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\n<p>The grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InLateJudaism\">In Late Judaism<\/p>\n<p>From the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\n<p>On another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\n<p>The debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\n<p>In order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\n<p>Enter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\n<p>The parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\n<p>The forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","summary_en":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34424,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Servant","title_en":"Servant","content_ro":"<h3>SERVANT<\/h3>\n<p>A person under obligation to serve a master, who in turn would provide a measure of protection. Some servants were slaves under legal bondage; others were servants voluntarily. It is not always possible to distinguish among “servant,” “slave,” “bondman,” and “bondwoman.” Several words in both Hebrew and Greek have been translated “servant,” although newer translations sometimes prefer other words.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word for “lad,” “youth,” or “boy” often means servant (Ex 33:11; Nm 22:22; 2 Kgs 4:12). A word meaning “free-born servant” referred to the servants of the Lord, like the Levites (Ezr 8:17; Is 61:6; Ez 44:11) or priests (Ex 28:35; Jl 1:9; 2:17). Sometimes ministers of the king are called servants (1 Chr 27:1; Prv 29:12), as are angels who minister before the Lord (Pss 103:21; 104:4). The hired servant or hireling was also considered a free person (Ex 12:45; Jb 7:1; Mal 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>The most common Hebrew term, occurring nearly 800 times in the OT, denotes a slave held in bondage (Gn 9:25; 12:16; Ex 20:17; Dt 5:15; 15:17). Yet the same word is used for people of noble rank, such as ministers and advisers to the king (2 Kgs 22:12; 2 Chr 34:20; Neh 2:10) or a servant of God (Gn 24:14; Nm 12:7; Jos 1:7; 2 Kgs 21:8), in such expressions as “Moses [or also David, Isaiah, Israel, Job, etc.] my servant.” One of the noblest expressions is “the servant of Yahweh [the <span>Lord<\/span>]” (Dt 34:5; Jos 1:13; 8:31-33; Is 49:1-6; 50:4-9; 52:13–53:12). The proper name Obadiah means “servant of Yahweh.”<\/p>\n<p>The NT variously defines servant as a hired servant or hireling (Mk 1:20; Lk 15:17-19; Jn 10:12-14), more widely as a slave (Mt 8:9; 10:24-25; 13:27-28; Mk 10:44; 12:2-4; Lk 7:2-3, 8-10; Jn 4:51; 8:34; 13:16; Eph 6:5; Col 1:7), and also as a domestic servant (Lk 16:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Slave, Slavery.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SERVANT<\/h3>\n<p>A person under obligation to serve a master, who in turn would provide a measure of protection. Some servants were slaves under legal bondage; others were servants voluntarily. It is not always possible to distinguish among “servant,” “slave,” “bondman,” and “bondwoman.” Several words in both Hebrew and Greek have been translated “servant,” although newer translations sometimes prefer other words.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word for “lad,” “youth,” or “boy” often means servant (Ex 33:11; Nm 22:22; 2 Kgs 4:12). A word meaning “free-born servant” referred to the servants of the Lord, like the Levites (Ezr 8:17; Is 61:6; Ez 44:11) or priests (Ex 28:35; Jl 1:9; 2:17). Sometimes ministers of the king are called servants (1 Chr 27:1; Prv 29:12), as are angels who minister before the Lord (Pss 103:21; 104:4). The hired servant or hireling was also considered a free person (Ex 12:45; Jb 7:1; Mal 3:5).<\/p>\n<p>The most common Hebrew term, occurring nearly 800 times in the OT, denotes a slave held in bondage (Gn 9:25; 12:16; Ex 20:17; Dt 5:15; 15:17). Yet the same word is used for people of noble rank, such as ministers and advisers to the king (2 Kgs 22:12; 2 Chr 34:20; Neh 2:10) or a servant of God (Gn 24:14; Nm 12:7; Jos 1:7; 2 Kgs 21:8), in such expressions as “Moses [or also David, Isaiah, Israel, Job, etc.] my servant.” One of the noblest expressions is “the servant of Yahweh [the <span>Lord<\/span>]” (Dt 34:5; Jos 1:13; 8:31-33; Is 49:1-6; 50:4-9; 52:13–53:12). The proper name Obadiah means “servant of Yahweh.”<\/p>\n<p>The NT variously defines servant as a hired servant or hireling (Mk 1:20; Lk 15:17-19; Jn 10:12-14), more widely as a slave (Mt 8:9; 10:24-25; 13:27-28; Mk 10:44; 12:2-4; Lk 7:2-3, 8-10; Jn 4:51; 8:34; 13:16; Eph 6:5; Col 1:7), and also as a domestic servant (Lk 16:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Slave, Slavery.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SERVANT A person under obligation to serve a master, who in turn would provide a measure of protection. Some servants were slaves under legal bondage; others were servants voluntarily. It is not always possible to distinguish among “servant,” “slave,” “bondman,” and “bondwoman.” Several words in both Hebrew and Greek have been translated “servant,” although newer translations sometimes prefer other words. The Hebrew word for “lad,” “youth,” or “boy” often means servant (Ex 33:11; Nm 22:22; 2 ...","summary_en":"SERVANT A person under obligation to serve a master, who in turn would provide a measure of protection. Some servants were slaves under legal bondage; others were servants voluntarily. It is not always possible to distinguish among “servant,” “slave,” “bondman,” and “bondwoman.” Several words in both Hebrew and Greek have been translated “servant,” although newer translations sometimes prefer other words. The Hebrew word for “lad,” “youth,” or “boy” often means servant (Ex 33:11; Nm 22:22; 2 ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43851,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:17","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:17<\/strong> This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my <em>neighbor<\/em> possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:17<\/strong> This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my <em>neighbor<\/em> possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:17 This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my neighbor possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.","summary_en":"20:17 This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my neighbor possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71477,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:17","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:17<\/strong> This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my <em>neighbor<\/em> possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:17<\/strong> This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my <em>neighbor<\/em> possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:17 This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my neighbor possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.","summary_en":"20:17 This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my neighbor possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99103,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:17","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:17<\/strong> This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my <em>neighbor<\/em> possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:17<\/strong> This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my <em>neighbor<\/em> possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:17 This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my neighbor possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.","summary_en":"20:17 This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my neighbor possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126729,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:17","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:17<\/strong> This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my <em>neighbor<\/em> possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:17<\/strong> This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my <em>neighbor<\/em> possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:17 This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my neighbor possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.","summary_en":"20:17 This final principle circles back to the first, for “a greedy person is an idolater” (Col 3:5). Covetousness is the worship of this world, the belief that possessions, especially those my neighbor possesses, will give me lasting happiness. To believe this is to break one’s covenant of absolute loyalty to God, who alone supplies our needs. See also Rom 7:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":24921,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mediator Mediate","title_en":"Mediator Mediate","content_ro":"<h3>MEDIATE, MEDIATOR<\/h3>\n<p>The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The mediator could make God stop beating me, and I would no longer live in terror of his punishment. Then I could speak to him without fear, but I cannot do that in my own strength” (Jb 9:32-35).<\/p>\n<p>More familiar is the mediation of instruction concerning the divine character and will. The Mosaic covenant was given through the mediation of angels and of Moses (Ex 20:18-21; Dt 33:2; Acts 7:53; Gal 3:19; contrast Heb 6:13-17, where God, acting alone, “mediated” an oath). The terms of the covenant law were expounded by prophets who “stood in God’s council,” and by priests who communicated God’s mind by oracle, sacred lot, and pronounced blessing (Dt 10:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 15:3; Jer 23:10-11, 18-22, 31-34; Mi 3:11; Mal 2:7).<\/p>\n<p>Most familiar is the liturgical mediation of the priest, whether by Moses (Ex 24:4-8) or by an appointed person trained in the rituals of worship (28:1). Because of Israel’s emphasis upon the holiness of God, sacrificial expiation, or “covering,” of sin figured largely in priestly mediation. The priest represented before God the people’s penitence, confession, and prayers for forgiveness, bearing the tribes’ names on shoulders and breastplate, and represented God, in turn, assuring his favor, forgiveness, and protection (see Heb 5:1-4; 7:27–10:11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>It was natural that the mission of Jesus should be described in mediatorial terms, and first as that of a prophet speaking for God to humans, making God known (Mk 6:15; 8:28). Where applied to Jesus, the actual title “mediator” refers mainly to his institution of a new covenant, establishing God’s new relationship with people (Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24). The one other instance is 1 Timothy 2:5, where the unity of God requires a sole, unrivaled mediator, namely, Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This last reference mentions Christ’s giving himself as “a ransom for all.” This essentially priestly function is the theme of Hebrews. Christ as Son of God, divinely appointed, sinless, suffering, tempted, sympathizing, and obedient, is uniquely qualified to be High Priest of his people. As priest, he offers a perfect sacrifice and lives forever to intercede for those who draw near to God through him. This mediatorial ministry places Jesus at “the right hand of God.” His intercession for people is mentioned also in Romans 8:34 and probably in 1 John 2:1, where ancient Greek commentators, <span>neb<\/span>, and other authoritative sources so understand “paraclete,” here applied to Jesus. His mediatorial sacrifice is mentioned in Matthew (Mt 26:28), John (Jn 1:29), Romans (Rom 3:25), and 1 John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Still more significant is the insistence, everywhere in the NT, that man’s knowledge of God, salvation, and hope come through Christ alone. Made poor for our sakes, he died and rose “for us”; our peace, access to God, reconciliation, expiation of sin, grace, truth, prayer, and “all spiritual blessings” are “through him,” “in him,” “through his blood,” and “in his name.” The purpose of God focuses in him; he mediated at Creation and at redemption (Col 1:15, 22); in him all the fullness of God dwells, and the face of Christ reveals God’s glory. No one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son reveals him; no one comes to the Father but by him; neither is there salvation in any other.<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s mediation is the fulfillment and end of all mediation between God and humankind. The book of Hebrews opens with the assertion that Christ surpasses all other mediators—angels, Moses, the Aaronic priesthood. His is a timeless priesthood, like Melchizedek’s. His sacrifice is unrepeatable, “once for all time,” and by it we have been consecrated to God “for all time.” The covenant he established between God and people offers better promises, sacrifice, sanctuary, and hope (Heb 7:19; 8:6; 9:1, 11-15). Christ’s mediation so far excels all others that it can never be superseded; he is priest without rival and forever (cf. 1 Tm 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Without using the priestly analogy, John emphasizes the same truth. The gulf between divine and human has been crossed, decisively and finally, by the Incarnation. Instead of standing between God and man, Christ unites both within himself by becoming man. Mediating in the beginning at Creation, Christ is himself the Word, which from God’s side mediates God’s mind, embodies God’s message, and conveys God’s power. No one has seen God at any time, but as unique Son and divine, Jesus “expounds” God (Jn 1:18). From the human side, Jesus prays for the disciples (ch 17), offers perfect obedience, lays down his life for his flock, and offers the unblemished sacrifice that bears away the sin of the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Reconciliation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MEDIATE, MEDIATOR<\/h3>\n<p>The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The mediator could make God stop beating me, and I would no longer live in terror of his punishment. Then I could speak to him without fear, but I cannot do that in my own strength” (Jb 9:32-35).<\/p>\n<p>More familiar is the mediation of instruction concerning the divine character and will. The Mosaic covenant was given through the mediation of angels and of Moses (Ex 20:18-21; Dt 33:2; Acts 7:53; Gal 3:19; contrast Heb 6:13-17, where God, acting alone, “mediated” an oath). The terms of the covenant law were expounded by prophets who “stood in God’s council,” and by priests who communicated God’s mind by oracle, sacred lot, and pronounced blessing (Dt 10:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 15:3; Jer 23:10-11, 18-22, 31-34; Mi 3:11; Mal 2:7).<\/p>\n<p>Most familiar is the liturgical mediation of the priest, whether by Moses (Ex 24:4-8) or by an appointed person trained in the rituals of worship (28:1). Because of Israel’s emphasis upon the holiness of God, sacrificial expiation, or “covering,” of sin figured largely in priestly mediation. The priest represented before God the people’s penitence, confession, and prayers for forgiveness, bearing the tribes’ names on shoulders and breastplate, and represented God, in turn, assuring his favor, forgiveness, and protection (see Heb 5:1-4; 7:27–10:11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>It was natural that the mission of Jesus should be described in mediatorial terms, and first as that of a prophet speaking for God to humans, making God known (Mk 6:15; 8:28). Where applied to Jesus, the actual title “mediator” refers mainly to his institution of a new covenant, establishing God’s new relationship with people (Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24). The one other instance is 1 Timothy 2:5, where the unity of God requires a sole, unrivaled mediator, namely, Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This last reference mentions Christ’s giving himself as “a ransom for all.” This essentially priestly function is the theme of Hebrews. Christ as Son of God, divinely appointed, sinless, suffering, tempted, sympathizing, and obedient, is uniquely qualified to be High Priest of his people. As priest, he offers a perfect sacrifice and lives forever to intercede for those who draw near to God through him. This mediatorial ministry places Jesus at “the right hand of God.” His intercession for people is mentioned also in Romans 8:34 and probably in 1 John 2:1, where ancient Greek commentators, <span>neb<\/span>, and other authoritative sources so understand “paraclete,” here applied to Jesus. His mediatorial sacrifice is mentioned in Matthew (Mt 26:28), John (Jn 1:29), Romans (Rom 3:25), and 1 John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Still more significant is the insistence, everywhere in the NT, that man’s knowledge of God, salvation, and hope come through Christ alone. Made poor for our sakes, he died and rose “for us”; our peace, access to God, reconciliation, expiation of sin, grace, truth, prayer, and “all spiritual blessings” are “through him,” “in him,” “through his blood,” and “in his name.” The purpose of God focuses in him; he mediated at Creation and at redemption (Col 1:15, 22); in him all the fullness of God dwells, and the face of Christ reveals God’s glory. No one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son reveals him; no one comes to the Father but by him; neither is there salvation in any other.<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s mediation is the fulfillment and end of all mediation between God and humankind. The book of Hebrews opens with the assertion that Christ surpasses all other mediators—angels, Moses, the Aaronic priesthood. His is a timeless priesthood, like Melchizedek’s. His sacrifice is unrepeatable, “once for all time,” and by it we have been consecrated to God “for all time.” The covenant he established between God and people offers better promises, sacrifice, sanctuary, and hope (Heb 7:19; 8:6; 9:1, 11-15). Christ’s mediation so far excels all others that it can never be superseded; he is priest without rival and forever (cf. 1 Tm 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Without using the priestly analogy, John emphasizes the same truth. The gulf between divine and human has been crossed, decisively and finally, by the Incarnation. Instead of standing between God and man, Christ unites both within himself by becoming man. Mediating in the beginning at Creation, Christ is himself the Word, which from God’s side mediates God’s mind, embodies God’s message, and conveys God’s power. No one has seen God at any time, but as unique Son and divine, Jesus “expounds” God (Jn 1:18). From the human side, Jesus prays for the disciples (ch 17), offers perfect obedience, lays down his life for his flock, and offers the unblemished sacrifice that bears away the sin of the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Reconciliation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MEDIATE, MEDIATOR The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority. In the Old Testament Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The me...","summary_en":"MEDIATE, MEDIATOR The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority. In the Old Testament Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The me...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43852,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:18","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:18-26<\/strong> This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:18-26<\/strong> This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:18-26 This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).","summary_en":"20:18-26 This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43853,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:18","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:18-21<\/strong> The <em>people<\/em> were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy <em>God<\/em> and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to <em>keep<\/em> them <em>from sinning<\/em> (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:18-21<\/strong> The <em>people<\/em> were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy <em>God<\/em> and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to <em>keep<\/em> them <em>from sinning<\/em> (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:18-21 The people were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy God and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to keep them from sinning (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).","summary_en":"20:18-21 The people were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy God and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to keep them from sinning (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71478,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:18","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:18-26<\/strong> This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:18-26<\/strong> This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:18-26 This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).","summary_en":"20:18-26 This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71479,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:18","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:18-21<\/strong> The <em>people<\/em> were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy <em>God<\/em> and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to <em>keep<\/em> them <em>from sinning<\/em> (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:18-21<\/strong> The <em>people<\/em> were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy <em>God<\/em> and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to <em>keep<\/em> them <em>from sinning<\/em> (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:18-21 The people were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy God and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to keep them from sinning (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).","summary_en":"20:18-21 The people were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy God and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to keep them from sinning (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99104,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:18","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:18-26<\/strong> This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:18-26<\/strong> This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:18-26 This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).","summary_en":"20:18-26 This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99105,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:18","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:18-21<\/strong> The <em>people<\/em> were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy <em>God<\/em> and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to <em>keep<\/em> them <em>from sinning<\/em> (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:18-21<\/strong> The <em>people<\/em> were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy <em>God<\/em> and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to <em>keep<\/em> them <em>from sinning<\/em> (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:18-21 The people were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy God and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to keep them from sinning (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).","summary_en":"20:18-21 The people were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy God and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to keep them from sinning (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126730,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:18","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:18-26<\/strong> This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:18-26<\/strong> This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:18-26 This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).","summary_en":"20:18-26 This interlude is about access to God. The first part (20:18-21) deals with the need for a mediator between the people and God. In 20:22-26, we find the appropriate form for an altar in the interval before God revealed his plans for a more permanent sanctuary (see 25:1–30:28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126731,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:18","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:18-21<\/strong> The <em>people<\/em> were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy <em>God<\/em> and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to <em>keep<\/em> them <em>from sinning<\/em> (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:18-21<\/strong> The <em>people<\/em> were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy <em>God<\/em> and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to <em>keep<\/em> them <em>from sinning<\/em> (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:18-21 The people were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy God and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to keep them from sinning (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).","summary_en":"20:18-21 The people were very conscious of their sinfulness before a holy God and begged Moses to stand between them and God. Moses pointed out that God’s goal was neither to overawe them nor to destroy them. Rather, he wanted their awe of him to keep them from sinning (20:20). Jesus is the ultimate mediator between God and people (1 Tim 2:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":40981,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","summary_en":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68607,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","summary_en":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96233,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","summary_en":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123859,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Moses<\/h3>\n<p>Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Moses’ mother, Jochebed, entrusted her infant son to God and set him afloat in the Nile in a reed basket. Pharaoh’s daughter found him and took him into the palace to raise as her own child (Exod 2:3-10).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about Moses’ upbringing. Jewish tradition holds that he received both administrative and military training in Pharaoh’s household. When he was about forty years old, he killed an Egyptian to rescue a Hebrew slave, and then he fled to Midian (2:11-15; cp. Acts 7:23-29). There he rescued some young women who were being harassed as they watered their flocks. Their father (Jethro) invited him home. Moses married one of the women, Zipporah, and began a family as he cared for his father-in-law’s flocks.<\/p>\n<p>About forty years later, God revealed himself to Moses in a burning bush and commissioned Moses to return to Egypt to rescue his people from slavery (Exod 3:1–4:17). Moses hesitated, fearful that the Israelites would not accept him as their leader. So God revealed to Moses his covenant name, Yahweh, and assigned Aaron as Moses’ spokesman.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and Aaron went to Egypt and confronted Pharaoh, who stubbornly resisted Moses' demand that he free the Israelite slaves. Moses then announced a series of plagues, which eventually convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites leave. After they had left Egypt, Pharaoh changed his mind and pursued them to the edge of the Red Sea. God enabled the Israelites to cross safely to the other side by dividing the waters; the pursuing Egyptian army was destroyed when the waters closed over them.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led Israel to Mount Sinai, where he had encountered God at the burning bush. God again revealed himself to Moses on that mountain, giving him the law (including the Ten Commandments; Exod 20:1–23:19) and directions for building the Tabernacle. But when Moses came down from the mountain, he found that the people had already deserted the true God by worshiping a gold calf (Exod 32). Moses threw down and broke the two tablets of the law and rallied the Levites to execute some of the offenders. After praying for the people, he received a new copy of the law and led the people in building the Tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p>Moses led a grumbling, rebellious, and distrustful people through the wilderness. Even his own brother and sister challenged his leadership, using his marriage to a Cushite woman as an excuse (Num 12). Moses responded with great humility, and God affirmed that Moses was his spokesman and confidant.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was a great man, but not a perfect one. When the people stretched his patience by complaining about a lack of water, Moses failed to follow God’s instructions and struck a certain rock rather than speaking to it (Num 20:1-13). His actions failed to demonstrate God’s holiness, and by what he said, Moses implied that he had brought the water by his own power (Num 20:10; cp. Ps 106:32-33). As a result, God did not allow him to enter the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>Before his death, Moses delivered a final sermon, known to us as the book of Deuteronomy. The first generation of Israelites, who had come out of Egypt, had died in the wilderness, so Moses was addressing a new generation. Moses renewed the covenant with this generation, reminded them of its terms, and encouraged them to obey it and serve the Lord alone.<\/p>\n<p>After giving this sermon and before Israel entered Canaan, Moses climbed Pisgah Peak on Mount Nebo, where he died. “There has never been another prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (Deut 34:10). Only Jesus surpassed Moses as a mediator between God and human beings (Acts 3:17-26; Heb 3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses is mentioned in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament figure, and he appeared at Jesus’ transfiguration. The New Testament emphasizes his role as lawgiver and draws from Moses’ experiences to show patterns of life under the new covenant. Like Moses, Jesus was rescued as an infant from the evil designs of a human despot (Matt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5–7) parallels the giving of the law at Sinai and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of God’s will. The letter to the Hebrews compares Christ with Moses, while Paul’s letter to the Galatians and the Gospel of John contrast the law of Moses with a believer’s new relationship with God (see John 1:17; Gal 3:1-5; Heb 3:5-6; 9:11–10:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 2:1-22; 3:1–19:25; 20:19-21; 24:1-18; 31:18; 32:1–34:35; 39:42-43; 40:16; Lev 8:1-36; 10:1-20; 24:10-23; Num 7:1-11, 89; 9:1-14; 10:29–14:45; 15:32-36; 16:1–17:13; 20:1-29; 21:4-9; 25:1-5; 27:1-23; 31:1–32:33; 33:1-2; Deut 1:1-5; 31:1–34:12; 1 Chr 23:13-17; Pss 77:20; 90:1-17; 103:7; 105:26-27; 106:32-33; Mark 9:2-13; Acts 7:17-44; 1 Cor 10:1-14; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:19; Heb 3:1-19; 8:5; 9:19-22; 11:23-28; 12:18-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","summary_en":"Moses Moses was the founding leader of Israel as a nation. God used Moses at a critical juncture in the history of his people. He was the prophet who received the law and mediated God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai (Exod 19:3-6). He was also the first known writer of Scripture. The younger brother of Miriam and Aaron, Moses was born in Egypt under dangerous circumstances (Exod 1:15–2:2). The Egyptian pharaoh, fearing a rebellion, had decreed that all Hebrew boys be killed at birth. Mos...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22686,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Biblical Concept of Law","title_en":"Biblical Concept of Law","content_ro":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalContext\">Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\n<p>Yet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, <span>niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\n<p>However, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LawintheOldTestament\">Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Torah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Synonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\n<p>These words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, <span>niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\n<p>How could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteLawandtheAncientNearEast\">Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLaws\">Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>The legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\n<p>The commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>The commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the <em>lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The <em>lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it <em>justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), <em>lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and <em>peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\n<p>God’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\n<p>By means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\n<p>The priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\n<p>The holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\n<p>The laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\n<p>The holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\n<p>Both promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposesoftheLaw\">Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\n<p>The law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\n<p>Maturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, <span>niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalContext\">Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\n<p>Yet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, <span>niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\n<p>However, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LawintheOldTestament\">Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Torah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Synonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\n<p>These words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, <span>niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\n<p>How could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteLawandtheAncientNearEast\">Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLaws\">Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>The legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\n<p>The commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>The commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the <em>lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The <em>lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it <em>justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), <em>lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and <em>peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\n<p>God’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\n<p>By means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\n<p>The priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\n<p>The holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\n<p>The laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\n<p>The holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\n<p>Both promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposesoftheLaw\">Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\n<p>The law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\n<p>Maturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, <span>niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","summary_en":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":8626,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Darkness","title_en":"Darkness","content_ro":"<h3>DARKNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Absence of light or brightness. Although the Bible seldom refers to literal darkness, a number of words translated “darkness” are used in a figurative or metaphorical sense.<\/p>\n<p>When God created the world, there was no light until he commanded that light appear. He then made distinction between light and its opposite, darkness, which he called night (Gn 1:2, 4-5, 18). Literal darkness is also mentioned in the account of the plagues God inflicted on Egypt; the ninth plague was an intense darkness that could be “felt” (Ex 10:21-23). That darkness lasted three days and was selective; wherever Egyptians were, it was dark, but where the Israelites were, there was light. The Israelites left Egypt accompanied by a cloud that separated them from their enemy, evidently giving light to the Israelites but making darkness for the Egyptians (Ex 14:20). The Bible notes that thieves or adulterers are likely to do their evil deeds in the dark or at night (Jb 24:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “darkness” is used twice in its literal sense. At the crucifixion of Jesus, for a three-hour period from noon to three o’clock, there was not light (Mt 27:45; Mk 15:33; Lk 23:44). The other reference is to Christ’s second coming, when “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light” (Mt 24:29, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Several biblical passages speak of a darkness surrounding God, evidently moving from a literal sense of absence of light to a more profound meaning. God spoke to Moses on Mt Sinai in a dense, black cloud (Ex 20:21; Dt 4:11) or from the darkness (Dt 5:23). Darkness is pictured as a shelter or cloak around God (2 Sm 22:12; Pss 18:11; 97:2). God sets a boundary for light and darkness (Jb 26:10), brings darkness (Pss 104:20; 105:28), and creates light and darkness (Is 45:7). God dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12; 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sm 22:10; Ps 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>Most figurative references to darkness appear in poetic material, such as Job, Psalms, and Isaiah. Generally, such darkness depicts ignorance about God’s will. Knowledge of God is “light”; hence, lack of such knowledge is “darkness” (Jb 12:24-25; Mt 4:16; Jn 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11).<\/p>\n<p>Job spoke of darkness as equivalent to nothingness (Jb 3:4-6). In other references darkness stands for death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Jb 10:21-22; 15:24; 17:12-13; 18:18; Eccl 6:4; 11:8).<\/p>\n<p>Darkness frequently stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gn 15:12; Jb 5:14; 12:25; 15:22, 30; 19:8; 22:11; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Is 5:30). Moral depravity is sometimes described as darkness (Prv 2:13; 4:19; Is 5:20; 60:2). In the NT darkness is generally a metaphor of moral depravity and spiritual ignorance (Mt 4:16; 6:23; Lk 1:79; 11:35; 22:53; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of OT prophets was the Day of the Lord, often associated with darkness (Ez 32:8; Jl 2:2, 31; Am 5:18, 20; Zep 1:15). The NT also links darkness with judgment in connection with Christ’s second coming (Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pt 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13). Those who come to know God are said to come out of darkness (Is 9:2; 29:18; 42:7); darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Jb 34:22; Ps 139:11-12; Is 29:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Light.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DARKNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Absence of light or brightness. Although the Bible seldom refers to literal darkness, a number of words translated “darkness” are used in a figurative or metaphorical sense.<\/p>\n<p>When God created the world, there was no light until he commanded that light appear. He then made distinction between light and its opposite, darkness, which he called night (Gn 1:2, 4-5, 18). Literal darkness is also mentioned in the account of the plagues God inflicted on Egypt; the ninth plague was an intense darkness that could be “felt” (Ex 10:21-23). That darkness lasted three days and was selective; wherever Egyptians were, it was dark, but where the Israelites were, there was light. The Israelites left Egypt accompanied by a cloud that separated them from their enemy, evidently giving light to the Israelites but making darkness for the Egyptians (Ex 14:20). The Bible notes that thieves or adulterers are likely to do their evil deeds in the dark or at night (Jb 24:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “darkness” is used twice in its literal sense. At the crucifixion of Jesus, for a three-hour period from noon to three o’clock, there was not light (Mt 27:45; Mk 15:33; Lk 23:44). The other reference is to Christ’s second coming, when “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light” (Mt 24:29, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Several biblical passages speak of a darkness surrounding God, evidently moving from a literal sense of absence of light to a more profound meaning. God spoke to Moses on Mt Sinai in a dense, black cloud (Ex 20:21; Dt 4:11) or from the darkness (Dt 5:23). Darkness is pictured as a shelter or cloak around God (2 Sm 22:12; Pss 18:11; 97:2). God sets a boundary for light and darkness (Jb 26:10), brings darkness (Pss 104:20; 105:28), and creates light and darkness (Is 45:7). God dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12; 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sm 22:10; Ps 18:9).<\/p>\n<p>Most figurative references to darkness appear in poetic material, such as Job, Psalms, and Isaiah. Generally, such darkness depicts ignorance about God’s will. Knowledge of God is “light”; hence, lack of such knowledge is “darkness” (Jb 12:24-25; Mt 4:16; Jn 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11).<\/p>\n<p>Job spoke of darkness as equivalent to nothingness (Jb 3:4-6). In other references darkness stands for death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Jb 10:21-22; 15:24; 17:12-13; 18:18; Eccl 6:4; 11:8).<\/p>\n<p>Darkness frequently stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gn 15:12; Jb 5:14; 12:25; 15:22, 30; 19:8; 22:11; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Is 5:30). Moral depravity is sometimes described as darkness (Prv 2:13; 4:19; Is 5:20; 60:2). In the NT darkness is generally a metaphor of moral depravity and spiritual ignorance (Mt 4:16; 6:23; Lk 1:79; 11:35; 22:53; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of OT prophets was the Day of the Lord, often associated with darkness (Ez 32:8; Jl 2:2, 31; Am 5:18, 20; Zep 1:15). The NT also links darkness with judgment in connection with Christ’s second coming (Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pt 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13). Those who come to know God are said to come out of darkness (Is 9:2; 29:18; 42:7); darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Jb 34:22; Ps 139:11-12; Is 29:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Light.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DARKNESS Absence of light or brightness. Although the Bible seldom refers to literal darkness, a number of words translated “darkness” are used in a figurative or metaphorical sense. When God created the world, there was no light until he commanded that light appear. He then made distinction between light and its opposite, darkness, which he called night (Gn 1:2, 4-5, 18). Literal darkness is also mentioned in the account of the plagues God inflicted on Egypt; the ninth plague was an intense ...","summary_en":"DARKNESS Absence of light or brightness. Although the Bible seldom refers to literal darkness, a number of words translated “darkness” are used in a figurative or metaphorical sense. When God created the world, there was no light until he commanded that light appear. He then made distinction between light and its opposite, darkness, which he called night (Gn 1:2, 4-5, 18). Literal darkness is also mentioned in the account of the plagues God inflicted on Egypt; the ninth plague was an intense ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63175,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":90801,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":118427,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146053,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Darkness and Light","title_en":"Darkness and Light","content_ro":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Darkness and Light<\/h3>\n<h5>Darkness<\/h5>\n<p>Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 <em>\/\/<\/em> 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sam 22:10 <em>\/\/<\/em> Ps 18:9). God is unknowable unless he reveals himself.<\/p>\n<p>Darkness often stands for distress and anxiety, or for the confusion and destruction experienced by the wicked (Gen 15:12; Job 12:25; 19:8; Pss 35:6; 107:10, 14; Eccl 5:17; Isa 5:30).<\/p>\n<p>For Job, darkness was like nothingness (Job 3:4-6). It points to death, a land of shadows and gloom, the dwelling place of the dead far from the light of day (Job 10:21-22; 17:12-13; Eccl 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Evil takes place under the cover of darkness (Job 24:16-17), but darkness cannot be a hiding place from God (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 29:15-16). Darkness often depicts ignorance of God’s will: Knowledge of God is “light,” so lack of knowledge is “darkness” (Job 12:24-25; Matt 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; 12:35, 46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9, 11). Moral depravity is described as darkness (Prov 2:13; 4:19; Isa 5:20; 60:2). In the New Testament, darkness is also a metaphor for spiritual ignorance (Matt 4:16; 6:23; Luke 1:79; 11:35; Rom 2:19; Col 1:13). Those who come to know God come out of darkness (Isa 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>A major theme of the Old Testament prophets was the Day of the Lord, which was often associated with darkness (Ezek 32:8; Joel 2:2, 31; Amos 5:18, 20; Zeph 1:15). The New Testament also links darkness with judgment (Matt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; 2 Pet 2:17; Jude 1:6, 13).<\/p>\n<h5>Light<\/h5>\n<p>Light was the first thing God created after the heavens and earth (Gen 1:3; see also 1:16). It is a natural symbol for what is pleasant, good, or uplifting (Eccl 11:7; Jas 1:17). When the Israelites left Egypt, they were led by a pillar of cloud and fire that gave them light (Exod 13:21; 14:20) and showed them the way to go (Neh 9:19). Light symbolizes the blessing of the Lord (Job 12:22; 29:2-3; Pss 4:6; 18:28; 44:3; 118:27). God’s servants can extend this blessing by being a light to guide others (Isa 42:6; 49:6). God’s light also exposes sin and brings justice (see Ps 90:8; Isa 51:4).<\/p>\n<p>God himself is described as light (Ps 27:1; Isa 60:19-20; Dan 2:22; 1 Jn 1:5), and he dwells in unapproachable light (see 1 Tim 6:16). Yet he brings his servants into the light (Mic 7:8-9; see also 1 Jn 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46). He brought a revelation (light) from God, but he was more than a revealer—he was himself that revelation (John 1:1-10). Those who receive Jesus, who believe in the Light, receive the right to become children of God (John 1:9-12). They are illumined by his light and come to know God and his salvation (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47; 26:18). They are “children of the light” (John 12:36; 1 Thes 5:5), their allegiance is to the light (1 Jn 1:7), and their conduct is characterized by light—by “what is good and right and true” (Eph 5:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:3-5, 14-18; 15:12; Exod 10:21-23; 14:20; 20:21; 2 Sam 22:10-13; 1 Kgs 8:12; Job 3:3-7; 12:22-25; 15:22; 17:12-13; 34:22; Pss 18:11, 28; 27:1; 97:2-6; 139:11-12; Prov 2:13; 4:18-19; Eccl 11:7-8; Isa 5:20; 9:2; 29:15; 51:4; 60:2-3, 19-20; Dan 2:22; Mic 7:8-9; Matt 4:16; 6:22-23; 8:12; Luke 1:78-79; 2:32; John 1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 2:19-20; Eph 5:7-14; 1 Thes 5:5-8; 1 Tim 6:16; Jas 1:17; 2 Pet 2:17; 1 Jn 1:5-7; 2:7-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","summary_en":"Darkness and Light Darkness Darkness is the absence of light. There was no light until God commanded that light appear. He then made a distinction between light and its absence (Gen 1:2, 4-5, 18). The ninth plague on Egypt was three days of intense darkness, a complete absence of light (Exod 10:21-23). There is a darkness surrounding God (Exod 20:21; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 2 Sam 22:12; Ps 18:11; 97:2); he dwells in thick darkness (1 Kgs 8:12 \/\/ 2 Chr 6:1), and thick darkness is under his feet (2 Sa...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":7891,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of the Covenant","title_en":"Book of the Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>COVENANT, Book of the<\/h3>\n<p>Phrase used by Moses in reference to the Ten Commandments and the laws and stipulations recorded in Exodus 20:22–23:33. <em>See<\/em> Book of the Covenant.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVENANT, Book of the<\/h3>\n<p>Phrase used by Moses in reference to the Ten Commandments and the laws and stipulations recorded in Exodus 20:22–23:33. <em>See<\/em> Book of the Covenant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVENANT, Book of the Phrase used by Moses in reference to the Ten Commandments and the laws and stipulations recorded in Exodus 20:22–23:33. See Book of the Covenant.","summary_en":"COVENANT, Book of the Phrase used by Moses in reference to the Ten Commandments and the laws and stipulations recorded in Exodus 20:22–23:33. See Book of the Covenant.","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":43854,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:22","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:22-26<\/strong> <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice <em>from heaven<\/em> (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use <em>silver or gold<\/em> to make gods in human form (<em>idols<\/em><em>,<\/em> 20:23), and they were not to carve <em>stones<\/em> for an <em>altar<\/em> (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of <em>earth<\/em> (20:24) and <em>uncut stones<\/em> (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s <em>nakedness<\/em> (20:26) might have been to separate Israelite religious practice from the nature worship around them. Sexual activity was an integral part of many Canaanite rituals.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:22-26<\/strong> <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice <em>from heaven<\/em> (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use <em>silver or gold<\/em> to make gods in human form (<em>idols<\/em><em>,<\/em> 20:23), and they were not to carve <em>stones<\/em> for an <em>altar<\/em> (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of <em>earth<\/em> (20:24) and <em>uncut stones<\/em> (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s <em>nakedness<\/em> (20:26) might have been to separate Israelite religious practice from the nature worship around them. Sexual activity was an integral part of many Canaanite rituals.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:22-26 The Lord is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice from heaven (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use silver or gold to make gods in human form (idols, 20:23), and they were not to carve stones for an altar (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of earth (20:24) and uncut stones (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s nak...","summary_en":"20:22-26 The Lord is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice from heaven (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use silver or gold to make gods in human form (idols, 20:23), and they were not to carve stones for an altar (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of earth (20:24) and uncut stones (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s nak...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71480,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:22","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:22-26<\/strong> <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice <em>from heaven<\/em> (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use <em>silver or gold<\/em> to make gods in human form (<em>idols<\/em><em>,<\/em> 20:23), and they were not to carve <em>stones<\/em> for an <em>altar<\/em> (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of <em>earth<\/em> (20:24) and <em>uncut stones<\/em> (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s <em>nakedness<\/em> (20:26) might have been to separate Israelite religious practice from the nature worship around them. Sexual activity was an integral part of many Canaanite rituals.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:22-26<\/strong> <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice <em>from heaven<\/em> (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use <em>silver or gold<\/em> to make gods in human form (<em>idols<\/em><em>,<\/em> 20:23), and they were not to carve <em>stones<\/em> for an <em>altar<\/em> (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of <em>earth<\/em> (20:24) and <em>uncut stones<\/em> (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s <em>nakedness<\/em> (20:26) might have been to separate Israelite religious practice from the nature worship around them. Sexual activity was an integral part of many Canaanite rituals.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:22-26 The Lord is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice from heaven (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use silver or gold to make gods in human form (idols, 20:23), and they were not to carve stones for an altar (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of earth (20:24) and uncut stones (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s nak...","summary_en":"20:22-26 The Lord is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice from heaven (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use silver or gold to make gods in human form (idols, 20:23), and they were not to carve stones for an altar (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of earth (20:24) and uncut stones (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s nak...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99106,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:22","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:22-26<\/strong> <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice <em>from heaven<\/em> (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use <em>silver or gold<\/em> to make gods in human form (<em>idols<\/em><em>,<\/em> 20:23), and they were not to carve <em>stones<\/em> for an <em>altar<\/em> (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of <em>earth<\/em> (20:24) and <em>uncut stones<\/em> (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s <em>nakedness<\/em> (20:26) might have been to separate Israelite religious practice from the nature worship around them. Sexual activity was an integral part of many Canaanite rituals.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:22-26<\/strong> <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice <em>from heaven<\/em> (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use <em>silver or gold<\/em> to make gods in human form (<em>idols<\/em><em>,<\/em> 20:23), and they were not to carve <em>stones<\/em> for an <em>altar<\/em> (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of <em>earth<\/em> (20:24) and <em>uncut stones<\/em> (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s <em>nakedness<\/em> (20:26) might have been to separate Israelite religious practice from the nature worship around them. Sexual activity was an integral part of many Canaanite rituals.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:22-26 The Lord is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice from heaven (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use silver or gold to make gods in human form (idols, 20:23), and they were not to carve stones for an altar (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of earth (20:24) and uncut stones (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s nak...","summary_en":"20:22-26 The Lord is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice from heaven (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use silver or gold to make gods in human form (idols, 20:23), and they were not to carve stones for an altar (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of earth (20:24) and uncut stones (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s nak...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":126732,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Exodul 20:22","title_en":"Study Note: Exodul 20:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:22-26<\/strong> <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice <em>from heaven<\/em> (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use <em>silver or gold<\/em> to make gods in human form (<em>idols<\/em><em>,<\/em> 20:23), and they were not to carve <em>stones<\/em> for an <em>altar<\/em> (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of <em>earth<\/em> (20:24) and <em>uncut stones<\/em> (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s <em>nakedness<\/em> (20:26) might have been to separate Israelite religious practice from the nature worship around them. Sexual activity was an integral part of many Canaanite rituals.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:22-26<\/strong> <em>The<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span> is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice <em>from heaven<\/em> (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use <em>silver or gold<\/em> to make gods in human form (<em>idols<\/em><em>,<\/em> 20:23), and they were not to carve <em>stones<\/em> for an <em>altar<\/em> (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of <em>earth<\/em> (20:24) and <em>uncut stones<\/em> (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s <em>nakedness<\/em> (20:26) might have been to separate Israelite religious practice from the nature worship around them. Sexual activity was an integral part of many Canaanite rituals.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:22-26 The Lord is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice from heaven (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use silver or gold to make gods in human form (idols, 20:23), and they were not to carve stones for an altar (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of earth (20:24) and uncut stones (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s nak...","summary_en":"20:22-26 The Lord is transcendent, as shown by his speaking to the people in a disembodied voice from heaven (20:22). This would have two effects upon their practice: They were not to use silver or gold to make gods in human form (idols, 20:23), and they were not to carve stones for an altar (20:25). Perhaps this is because they would be tempted to carve stone gods in the process. The altar was to be made of earth (20:24) and uncut stones (20:25). • The prohibition against revealing one’s nak...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":22760,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Biblical Concept of Law","title_en":"Biblical Concept of Law","content_ro":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalContext\">Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\n<p>Yet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, <span>niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\n<p>However, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LawintheOldTestament\">Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Torah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Synonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\n<p>These words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, <span>niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\n<p>How could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteLawandtheAncientNearEast\">Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLaws\">Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>The legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\n<p>The commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>The commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the <em>lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The <em>lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it <em>justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), <em>lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and <em>peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\n<p>God’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\n<p>By means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\n<p>The priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\n<p>The holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\n<p>The laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\n<p>The holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\n<p>Both promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposesoftheLaw\">Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\n<p>The law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\n<p>Maturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, <span>niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\n<p>God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalContext\">Historical Context<\/p>\n<p>When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\n<p>Yet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, <span>niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\n<p>However, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LawintheOldTestament\">Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Torah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\n<p>Synonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\n<p>These words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, <span>niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\n<p>How could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteLawandtheAncientNearEast\">Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLaws\">Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n<p>The legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\n<p>The commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>The commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\n<p>The purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the <em>lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The <em>lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it <em>justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), <em>lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and <em>peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\n<p>God’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\n<p>By means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\n<p>The priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\n<p>The holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\n<p>The laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\n<p>The holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\n<p>Both promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposesoftheLaw\">Purposes of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\n<p>The law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\n<p>Maturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, <span>niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","summary_en":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25811,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Minerals* and Metals","title_en":"Minerals* and Metals","content_ro":"<h3>MINERALS* AND METALS<\/h3>\n<p>A “mineral” is a naturally occurring substance, normally an ore that must be mined and treated before the metal can be extracted. A “metal” is a chemical element such as iron or copper, which is free from contamination by other materials. Metals in a pure form generally do not occur in nature, though there are exceptions.<\/p>\n<p>In Palestine, mining and smelting are ancient arts, practiced long before the Israelites arrived. The quarrying of suitable stones, such as flint, for toolmaking goes back to the Stone Age; the quarrying of stone for building is also an ancient craft. In particular, metals, native gold, copper, and meteoric iron were known and used in the Middle East before 4000 <span>BC<\/span>. From 4000 to 3000 <span>BC<\/span>, native silver became known as well as copper and lead ores. The art of smelting was discovered probably almost by accident, resulting in the production of alloys like bronze. Then the reduction of oxidized iron was discovered. From 3000 to 2000 <span>BC<\/span>, important advances were made. Copper sulfides and tin oxides were reduced to metal, and metallic tin and copper became important items of trade.<\/p>\n<p>In the years 2000 to 1000 <span>BC<\/span>, bellows came into use for furnaces, and iron was reduced from its ores and forged. The art of making brass from copper and zinc was discovered about 1500 <span>BC<\/span> but did not become significant till somewhat later. Bronze, known for many centuries, was made sometimes with a high tin content to form speculum for mirrors. By this time the Israelites were settled in the land and the kingdom was established. From 1000 <span>BC<\/span> to the start of the Christian era, the production of metals, especially iron, greatly expanded. A form of steel was made and used for weapons and tools.<\/p>\n<p>By the time of David and Solomon, the Israelites had learned many skills in the preparation and working of metals. Under David, Edom, with its rich copper and iron deposits, was conquered (2 Sm 8:13-14) and there was a lot of activity in the casting of metals in the Jordan Valley (1 Kgs 7:13-14, 45-46). In this activity Solomon had the assistance of Hiram, a Phoenician artisan. Israelite tradition associated the origins of metallurgy with Tubal-cain (Gn 4:22), who is said to have forged all kinds of tools out of bronze and iron. Deuteronomy 8:9 refers to the presence of iron and copper in the land to which Israel was going.<\/p>\n<p>While the Israelites eventually undertook their own metalworking processes, it is evident from 1 Samuel 13:19-22 that on at least one occasion, in the days of Philistine domination, they were obliged to have their agricultural tools made by their enemies. Similarly, the manufacture of cult vessels for Solomon’s temple was supervised by Phoenician artisans (1 Kgs 7:13-50).<\/p>\n<p>Minerals, metals, and precious stones were also important items of trade. Israel was never a land rich in these commodities and was obliged to import a wide variety of them. The visit of the queen of Sheba was partly diplomatic and partly for trade (1 Kgs 10:2, 10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Metals and precious stones featured also among the booty carried off by invaders, notably—but not only—by the Egyptians and Assyrians. These items were in constant demand as they were needed for agriculture and making weapons of war, and for the manufacture of jewelry and items of personal adornment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Minerals\">Minerals<\/p>\n<p>A mineral is an inorganic substance with a definite chemical composition and structure, sometimes occurring alone or sometimes combined with others. “Ore” refers to any mineral or mineral aggregate containing chemical compounds of metals in sufficient quantity and grade to make the extraction of the metal commercially profitable. The essential element, the metal, occurs in nature as a chemical compound, such as a sulfide, an oxide, a carbonate, or some other compound, though the sulfides and oxides are the most common. Minerals exhibit a variety of properties, such as color, luster, crystal form, cleavage, fracture, hardness, and density, which help in their identification and exercise control on the commercial and industrial uses of the particular mineral.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Metals\">Metals<\/p>\n<p>A metal in its pure form is a chemically pure element with its own fixed physical properties, such as density, tensile strength, crystalline structure, melting point, ductility, conductivity, and the like. Metals form alloys with other metals, but this process destroys their purity. In both the ancient world and the modern world the alloy is extremely important.<\/p>\n<p>In order to obtain a pure metal, the ore in which the metal is contained must be smelted—a process known as metallurgy. In ancient Israel pure metals were widely used—among them were gold, silver, iron, and lead. Yet alloys such as bronze and brass were even more widely used.<\/p>\n<h5>Metallurgy and Metal Extraction<\/h5>\n<p>The method of producing hard wrought iron was discovered by the Hittites of Asia Minor about 1300 <span>BC<\/span>, and was taken up by the Philistines (1 Sm 13:19-20). At first, the iron obtained from simple furnaces was drawn off and hammered to drive out slag (Dt 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:51; Jer 11:4). Later, the addition of carbon produced an early form of steel.<\/p>\n<p>The lead sulfide ore is heated with lime in a flow of air. A slag with rock particles forms. The air is then cut off and the temperature is raised. Finally, the lead flows free.<\/p>\n<p>The OT refers to the mining of silver (Jb 28:1), the refining of the metal (Zec 13:9; Mal 3:3), the melting of scrap metals or jeweler’s remnants (Ez 22:20-22), and of multiple refinings in a crucible (Prv 17:3; 27:21) to produce refined silver (1 Chr 29:4; Ps 12:6; Prv 10:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Specific Metals<\/h5>\n<p>Although several OT passages suggest that the science of metallurgy was known in biblical times, comparatively little archaeological evidence is available. The processing plants were small and were used for the treatment of copper and iron. The archaeological record is far from complete, but the general impression is that metallic ores were comparatively rare in Palestine; imports must have been considerable. However, numerous molds for casting agricultural and military tools have come to light in excavations. Evidently, some refined metal was available locally, but perhaps most of it was imported. The metal was then heated and poured into the appropriate earthenware or pottery mold.<\/p>\n<p>There are many references to metals in the Bible, but especially to gold, silver, iron, and lead. While copper was widely used, it was normally in the form of its alloys, bronze and brass. There are comparatively few references to tin as such, though it was used in manufacturing bronze. Similarly zinc, though used in the manufacture of brass, is not mentioned in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Gold is referred to hundreds of times in the OT and NT, more frequently than any other metal. It is often mentioned together with silver, and in the majority of cases silver is mentioned first, reflecting a time when gold was less valued.<\/p>\n<p>Gold was used in the manufacture of ornaments for personal use (Gn 24:53; 41:42; Ex 3:22; 11:2; 12:35). Gold was important in worship both in Israel and among the non-Israelites. References to pagan gods occur in several passages (Ex 20:23; 32:2-4; Ps 115:4; Is 2:20; 30:22; 31:7; 40:19; 46:6; Hos 8:4). It seems that the gold was melted down and later engraved so that the replicas could be called both molten images (Ex 32:24) and graven images. The tabernacle and the temple used a great deal of gold. The wooden ark was covered inside and outside with gold (25:11). Other timber pieces were overlaid with gold (25:11; 1 Kgs 6:20-22, 30).<\/p>\n<p>The vessels and utensils used in the tabernacle and temple were made of “pure gold”: the cherubim (Ex 25:18; 37:7), the mercy seat (25:17; 37:6), the candlestick (Ex 25:31; Zec 4:2), various vessels (Ex 25:38; 2 Kgs 24:13), chains to carry the ephod (Ex 28:14), and the bells on the high priest’s robe. The high priest’s crown, ephod, and breastplate were also of gold (39:2-30). The offerings collected for the manufacture of such articles in the wilderness include golden dishes weighing 120 shekels (Nm 7:86). The more lavishly adorned temple apparently used more gold than the tabernacle (1 Kgs 6:20-28; 1 Chr 29:2-7; 2 Chr 3:4–4:22). The number of specific references to gold in the tabernacle and temple is far too great to mention all of them here. The large amount of gold used in the temple was attractive to invaders, who would strip the temple of its gold and carry it off as booty (1 Kgs 14:26; 2 Kgs 16:8; 18:14; 24:13; 25:15; 2 Chr 12:9).<\/p>\n<p>Gold had commercial value. It was imported in Solomon’s day, and up to 666 talents were brought to Israel annually (1 Kgs 10:14). Hiram of Tyre gave Solomon 120 talents of gold (9:14), possibly as a loan. Certainly Solomon used a lot of gold in the temple (10:16-17). Gold was useful, too, for buying off an enemy (2 Kgs 16:8) or simply as tribute (18:14). Evidence of this comes also from the Assyrian annals, where the tribute taken from various lands often included gold.<\/p>\n<p>The possession of gold was not in itself an evil thing, but preoccupation with its accumulation was condemned (Jb 28:15-17; Prv 3:14; 8:10, 19; 16:16). The possession of wisdom and the knowledge of God was of greater value than the possession of much gold (Pss 19:10; 119:72, 127; Prv 20:15). Job rejected trust in gold (Jb 31:24). Gold would not save a man in the day of judgment (Zep 1:18).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT gold was regarded as perishable (Jas 5:3; 1 Pt 1:18) and as an unnecessary burden to carry (Mt 10:9; Acts 3:6). The wearing of a gold ring was certainly no measure of a man’s worth (Jas 2:2); indeed, both Paul and Peter forbade it (1 Tm 2:9; 1 Pt 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>The use of gold in itself was no measure of piety. The elders of Revelation 4:4 wore golden crowns, but the great harlot was “bedecked with gold” (Rv 17:4), as was the harlot city Babylon (18:16). By contrast, there are some positive statements in the NT about the value of gold (3:18). The wise men brought gold to the infant Jesus as a symbol of his kingly character (Mt 2:11), and the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, was a city of gold, clear as glass (Rv 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, silver is mentioned in several connections. Being a precious metal, once considered more precious than gold, it was regularly used in commerce for the payments of debts. Small pieces of silver were weighed into a balance against a standard weight. Abraham bought the cave at Machpelah as a burial place for Sarah for 400 shekels of silver and weighed out the “money” according to the weight’s current value with the merchant (Gn 23:15-16). Joseph’s brothers received 20 pieces of silver in payment for Joseph (37:28), and Benjamin was given a money gift by Joseph in pieces of silver (45:22).<\/p>\n<p>There are other examples of payment in silver for commodities or services (Gn 20:16; Ex 21:32; Lv 27:16; Jos 24:32; Jgs 17:10; 2 Sm 24:24; Neh 7:72; Jb 28:15; Is 7:23; 46:6; Am 2:6; 8:6). Silver was a measure of a man’s wealth (Gn 13:2; 24:35; Ex 25:3; Nm 22:18; Dt 7:25; Zep 1:18; Hg 2:8; Zec 6:11). An unusual comment in 1 Kings 10:21 notes that in Solomon’s day “it was not considered as anything,” apparently because it was so plentiful. It was regularly taken as booty (Jos 6:19; 7:21; 1 Kgs 15:18). Sometimes the drinking cup of an important man was made of silver (Gn 44:2). Sometimes, too, a royal crown was made of gold and silver (Zec 6:11). It was important in the manufacture of personal ornaments (Gn 24:53; Ex 3:22; 12:35), and one example is given of ornaments of gold studded with silver (Sg 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>The process of refining silver was used as a metaphor for the trying of people’s hearts (Ps 66:10; Is 48:10), and the tarnishing and deterioration of silver was a picture of the disintegration of one’s character (Is 1:22; Jer 6:30). God’s Word is pictured as “pure” silver refined and purified in a furnace. Despite silver’s great value, wisdom excels it (Job 28:15; Prv 3:14; 8:19; 10:20; 16:16; 22:1; 25:11).<\/p>\n<p>Native copper is mentioned in Deuteronomy 8:9, though the reference may be to one of its ores. More commonly, biblical references are to brass, the alloy of copper and zinc. However, the chemical analysis of copper-based tools and implements during the middle and late Bronze Ages (c. 2000–1200 <span>BC<\/span>) shows that the material was bronze. References to brass in the <span>kjv<\/span> are therefore to bronze.<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, copper in the form of alloys (bronze and brass) was widely used. Bronze coinage was well known and this may be the sense of Matthew 10:9. The widow’s mite was a tiny bronze coin, the lepton. Bronze utensils and vessels were well known (Rv 9:20; 18:12). The reference to “sounding brass” (<span>kjv<\/span>) in 1 Corinthians 13:1 may actually be to brass, which was a bright, shining alloy, and was used in musical instruments. In the vision of John in Revelation (Rv 1:15; 2:18), the Son of Man had feet of fine brass (<span>nlt<\/span> “bronze”).<\/p>\n<p>The Iron Age began in Palestine about 1200 <span>BC<\/span>, that is, in the days of the judges, though native iron had been known in Egypt in the predynastic period. Archaeological evidence suggests that the smelting of iron ore was discovered by the Hittites about 1400 <span>BC<\/span>. The Philistines seem to have introduced iron to Palestine about 1300 <span>BC<\/span>. In the days of Moses an encounter with the Midianites produced much tribute, among which iron is mentioned (Nm 31:22). When Israel captured Jericho, the spoils included iron (Jos 6:24). Manasseh’s half-tribe also took booty including iron (22:8). In the days of the judges the Canaanites were equipped with chariots of iron (Jos 17:16-18; Jgs 1:19; 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>These early references point to the arrival of iron at the start of the Iron Age. The Philistines enjoyed a local monopoly in its use (1 Sm 13:19-21), and their mighty warrior Goliath was armed with an iron spear (17:7). It was not long, however, before Israel learned the use of iron (2 Sm 12:31; 23:7). Evidently, by Solomon’s time, iron was widely used, because builders of the temple were forbidden to use iron tools (1 Kgs 6:7). The false prophet Zedekiah in Ahab’s day used the horns of iron to thrust toward Syria as he spoke of their defeat (22:11).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Isaiah in the eighth century <span>BC<\/span> referred to iron (Is 10:34), and Jeremiah later spoke of the metal in several places (Jer 1:18; 6:28; 11:4; 15:12; 17:1; 28:13-14). Ezekiel made use of an iron plate in one of his symbolic actions (Ez 4:3), referred to iron in his description of smelting (22:18, 20), and listed it as a commodity for trade (27:12, 19). The prophet Amos spoke of threshing instruments of iron (Am 1:3). Micah used iron as a symbol for military might (Mi 4:13). The book of Daniel makes several references to it (Dn 2:33-35, 40-45; 4:15, 23; 7:7, 19).<\/p>\n<p>By Roman times, iron weapons were the regular implements of war. Gates of iron were used to close prisons (Acts 12:10), and in a symbolic usage powerful rulers were said to rule with a rod of iron (Rv 2:27; 9:9; 12:5; 19:15). The term “iron” was used also in some metaphorical expressions. The smelting of iron was a symbol of testing and suffering (Dt 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:51; Jer 11:4; Ez 22:18), a pillar of iron was symbolic of strength (Jer 1:18), and an iron rod of harsh rule (Ps 2:9; Rv 2:27; 12:5; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Coppersmith; Goldsmith; Ironsmith; Mason, Masonry; Silversmith; Stones, Precious.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MINERALS* AND METALS<\/h3>\n<p>A “mineral” is a naturally occurring substance, normally an ore that must be mined and treated before the metal can be extracted. A “metal” is a chemical element such as iron or copper, which is free from contamination by other materials. Metals in a pure form generally do not occur in nature, though there are exceptions.<\/p>\n<p>In Palestine, mining and smelting are ancient arts, practiced long before the Israelites arrived. The quarrying of suitable stones, such as flint, for toolmaking goes back to the Stone Age; the quarrying of stone for building is also an ancient craft. In particular, metals, native gold, copper, and meteoric iron were known and used in the Middle East before 4000 <span>BC<\/span>. From 4000 to 3000 <span>BC<\/span>, native silver became known as well as copper and lead ores. The art of smelting was discovered probably almost by accident, resulting in the production of alloys like bronze. Then the reduction of oxidized iron was discovered. From 3000 to 2000 <span>BC<\/span>, important advances were made. Copper sulfides and tin oxides were reduced to metal, and metallic tin and copper became important items of trade.<\/p>\n<p>In the years 2000 to 1000 <span>BC<\/span>, bellows came into use for furnaces, and iron was reduced from its ores and forged. The art of making brass from copper and zinc was discovered about 1500 <span>BC<\/span> but did not become significant till somewhat later. Bronze, known for many centuries, was made sometimes with a high tin content to form speculum for mirrors. By this time the Israelites were settled in the land and the kingdom was established. From 1000 <span>BC<\/span> to the start of the Christian era, the production of metals, especially iron, greatly expanded. A form of steel was made and used for weapons and tools.<\/p>\n<p>By the time of David and Solomon, the Israelites had learned many skills in the preparation and working of metals. Under David, Edom, with its rich copper and iron deposits, was conquered (2 Sm 8:13-14) and there was a lot of activity in the casting of metals in the Jordan Valley (1 Kgs 7:13-14, 45-46). In this activity Solomon had the assistance of Hiram, a Phoenician artisan. Israelite tradition associated the origins of metallurgy with Tubal-cain (Gn 4:22), who is said to have forged all kinds of tools out of bronze and iron. Deuteronomy 8:9 refers to the presence of iron and copper in the land to which Israel was going.<\/p>\n<p>While the Israelites eventually undertook their own metalworking processes, it is evident from 1 Samuel 13:19-22 that on at least one occasion, in the days of Philistine domination, they were obliged to have their agricultural tools made by their enemies. Similarly, the manufacture of cult vessels for Solomon’s temple was supervised by Phoenician artisans (1 Kgs 7:13-50).<\/p>\n<p>Minerals, metals, and precious stones were also important items of trade. Israel was never a land rich in these commodities and was obliged to import a wide variety of them. The visit of the queen of Sheba was partly diplomatic and partly for trade (1 Kgs 10:2, 10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Metals and precious stones featured also among the booty carried off by invaders, notably—but not only—by the Egyptians and Assyrians. These items were in constant demand as they were needed for agriculture and making weapons of war, and for the manufacture of jewelry and items of personal adornment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Minerals\">Minerals<\/p>\n<p>A mineral is an inorganic substance with a definite chemical composition and structure, sometimes occurring alone or sometimes combined with others. “Ore” refers to any mineral or mineral aggregate containing chemical compounds of metals in sufficient quantity and grade to make the extraction of the metal commercially profitable. The essential element, the metal, occurs in nature as a chemical compound, such as a sulfide, an oxide, a carbonate, or some other compound, though the sulfides and oxides are the most common. Minerals exhibit a variety of properties, such as color, luster, crystal form, cleavage, fracture, hardness, and density, which help in their identification and exercise control on the commercial and industrial uses of the particular mineral.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Metals\">Metals<\/p>\n<p>A metal in its pure form is a chemically pure element with its own fixed physical properties, such as density, tensile strength, crystalline structure, melting point, ductility, conductivity, and the like. Metals form alloys with other metals, but this process destroys their purity. In both the ancient world and the modern world the alloy is extremely important.<\/p>\n<p>In order to obtain a pure metal, the ore in which the metal is contained must be smelted—a process known as metallurgy. In ancient Israel pure metals were widely used—among them were gold, silver, iron, and lead. Yet alloys such as bronze and brass were even more widely used.<\/p>\n<h5>Metallurgy and Metal Extraction<\/h5>\n<p>The method of producing hard wrought iron was discovered by the Hittites of Asia Minor about 1300 <span>BC<\/span>, and was taken up by the Philistines (1 Sm 13:19-20). At first, the iron obtained from simple furnaces was drawn off and hammered to drive out slag (Dt 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:51; Jer 11:4). Later, the addition of carbon produced an early form of steel.<\/p>\n<p>The lead sulfide ore is heated with lime in a flow of air. A slag with rock particles forms. The air is then cut off and the temperature is raised. Finally, the lead flows free.<\/p>\n<p>The OT refers to the mining of silver (Jb 28:1), the refining of the metal (Zec 13:9; Mal 3:3), the melting of scrap metals or jeweler’s remnants (Ez 22:20-22), and of multiple refinings in a crucible (Prv 17:3; 27:21) to produce refined silver (1 Chr 29:4; Ps 12:6; Prv 10:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Specific Metals<\/h5>\n<p>Although several OT passages suggest that the science of metallurgy was known in biblical times, comparatively little archaeological evidence is available. The processing plants were small and were used for the treatment of copper and iron. The archaeological record is far from complete, but the general impression is that metallic ores were comparatively rare in Palestine; imports must have been considerable. However, numerous molds for casting agricultural and military tools have come to light in excavations. Evidently, some refined metal was available locally, but perhaps most of it was imported. The metal was then heated and poured into the appropriate earthenware or pottery mold.<\/p>\n<p>There are many references to metals in the Bible, but especially to gold, silver, iron, and lead. While copper was widely used, it was normally in the form of its alloys, bronze and brass. There are comparatively few references to tin as such, though it was used in manufacturing bronze. Similarly zinc, though used in the manufacture of brass, is not mentioned in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Gold is referred to hundreds of times in the OT and NT, more frequently than any other metal. It is often mentioned together with silver, and in the majority of cases silver is mentioned first, reflecting a time when gold was less valued.<\/p>\n<p>Gold was used in the manufacture of ornaments for personal use (Gn 24:53; 41:42; Ex 3:22; 11:2; 12:35). Gold was important in worship both in Israel and among the non-Israelites. References to pagan gods occur in several passages (Ex 20:23; 32:2-4; Ps 115:4; Is 2:20; 30:22; 31:7; 40:19; 46:6; Hos 8:4). It seems that the gold was melted down and later engraved so that the replicas could be called both molten images (Ex 32:24) and graven images. The tabernacle and the temple used a great deal of gold. The wooden ark was covered inside and outside with gold (25:11). Other timber pieces were overlaid with gold (25:11; 1 Kgs 6:20-22, 30).<\/p>\n<p>The vessels and utensils used in the tabernacle and temple were made of “pure gold”: the cherubim (Ex 25:18; 37:7), the mercy seat (25:17; 37:6), the candlestick (Ex 25:31; Zec 4:2), various vessels (Ex 25:38; 2 Kgs 24:13), chains to carry the ephod (Ex 28:14), and the bells on the high priest’s robe. The high priest’s crown, ephod, and breastplate were also of gold (39:2-30). The offerings collected for the manufacture of such articles in the wilderness include golden dishes weighing 120 shekels (Nm 7:86). The more lavishly adorned temple apparently used more gold than the tabernacle (1 Kgs 6:20-28; 1 Chr 29:2-7; 2 Chr 3:4–4:22). The number of specific references to gold in the tabernacle and temple is far too great to mention all of them here. The large amount of gold used in the temple was attractive to invaders, who would strip the temple of its gold and carry it off as booty (1 Kgs 14:26; 2 Kgs 16:8; 18:14; 24:13; 25:15; 2 Chr 12:9).<\/p>\n<p>Gold had commercial value. It was imported in Solomon’s day, and up to 666 talents were brought to Israel annually (1 Kgs 10:14). Hiram of Tyre gave Solomon 120 talents of gold (9:14), possibly as a loan. Certainly Solomon used a lot of gold in the temple (10:16-17). Gold was useful, too, for buying off an enemy (2 Kgs 16:8) or simply as tribute (18:14). Evidence of this comes also from the Assyrian annals, where the tribute taken from various lands often included gold.<\/p>\n<p>The possession of gold was not in itself an evil thing, but preoccupation with its accumulation was condemned (Jb 28:15-17; Prv 3:14; 8:10, 19; 16:16). The possession of wisdom and the knowledge of God was of greater value than the possession of much gold (Pss 19:10; 119:72, 127; Prv 20:15). Job rejected trust in gold (Jb 31:24). Gold would not save a man in the day of judgment (Zep 1:18).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT gold was regarded as perishable (Jas 5:3; 1 Pt 1:18) and as an unnecessary burden to carry (Mt 10:9; Acts 3:6). The wearing of a gold ring was certainly no measure of a man’s worth (Jas 2:2); indeed, both Paul and Peter forbade it (1 Tm 2:9; 1 Pt 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>The use of gold in itself was no measure of piety. The elders of Revelation 4:4 wore golden crowns, but the great harlot was “bedecked with gold” (Rv 17:4), as was the harlot city Babylon (18:16). By contrast, there are some positive statements in the NT about the value of gold (3:18). The wise men brought gold to the infant Jesus as a symbol of his kingly character (Mt 2:11), and the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, was a city of gold, clear as glass (Rv 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, silver is mentioned in several connections. Being a precious metal, once considered more precious than gold, it was regularly used in commerce for the payments of debts. Small pieces of silver were weighed into a balance against a standard weight. Abraham bought the cave at Machpelah as a burial place for Sarah for 400 shekels of silver and weighed out the “money” according to the weight’s current value with the merchant (Gn 23:15-16). Joseph’s brothers received 20 pieces of silver in payment for Joseph (37:28), and Benjamin was given a money gift by Joseph in pieces of silver (45:22).<\/p>\n<p>There are other examples of payment in silver for commodities or services (Gn 20:16; Ex 21:32; Lv 27:16; Jos 24:32; Jgs 17:10; 2 Sm 24:24; Neh 7:72; Jb 28:15; Is 7:23; 46:6; Am 2:6; 8:6). Silver was a measure of a man’s wealth (Gn 13:2; 24:35; Ex 25:3; Nm 22:18; Dt 7:25; Zep 1:18; Hg 2:8; Zec 6:11). An unusual comment in 1 Kings 10:21 notes that in Solomon’s day “it was not considered as anything,” apparently because it was so plentiful. It was regularly taken as booty (Jos 6:19; 7:21; 1 Kgs 15:18). Sometimes the drinking cup of an important man was made of silver (Gn 44:2). Sometimes, too, a royal crown was made of gold and silver (Zec 6:11). It was important in the manufacture of personal ornaments (Gn 24:53; Ex 3:22; 12:35), and one example is given of ornaments of gold studded with silver (Sg 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>The process of refining silver was used as a metaphor for the trying of people’s hearts (Ps 66:10; Is 48:10), and the tarnishing and deterioration of silver was a picture of the disintegration of one’s character (Is 1:22; Jer 6:30). God’s Word is pictured as “pure” silver refined and purified in a furnace. Despite silver’s great value, wisdom excels it (Job 28:15; Prv 3:14; 8:19; 10:20; 16:16; 22:1; 25:11).<\/p>\n<p>Native copper is mentioned in Deuteronomy 8:9, though the reference may be to one of its ores. More commonly, biblical references are to brass, the alloy of copper and zinc. However, the chemical analysis of copper-based tools and implements during the middle and late Bronze Ages (c. 2000–1200 <span>BC<\/span>) shows that the material was bronze. References to brass in the <span>kjv<\/span> are therefore to bronze.<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, copper in the form of alloys (bronze and brass) was widely used. Bronze coinage was well known and this may be the sense of Matthew 10:9. The widow’s mite was a tiny bronze coin, the lepton. Bronze utensils and vessels were well known (Rv 9:20; 18:12). The reference to “sounding brass” (<span>kjv<\/span>) in 1 Corinthians 13:1 may actually be to brass, which was a bright, shining alloy, and was used in musical instruments. In the vision of John in Revelation (Rv 1:15; 2:18), the Son of Man had feet of fine brass (<span>nlt<\/span> “bronze”).<\/p>\n<p>The Iron Age began in Palestine about 1200 <span>BC<\/span>, that is, in the days of the judges, though native iron had been known in Egypt in the predynastic period. Archaeological evidence suggests that the smelting of iron ore was discovered by the Hittites about 1400 <span>BC<\/span>. The Philistines seem to have introduced iron to Palestine about 1300 <span>BC<\/span>. In the days of Moses an encounter with the Midianites produced much tribute, among which iron is mentioned (Nm 31:22). When Israel captured Jericho, the spoils included iron (Jos 6:24). Manasseh’s half-tribe also took booty including iron (22:8). In the days of the judges the Canaanites were equipped with chariots of iron (Jos 17:16-18; Jgs 1:19; 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>These early references point to the arrival of iron at the start of the Iron Age. The Philistines enjoyed a local monopoly in its use (1 Sm 13:19-21), and their mighty warrior Goliath was armed with an iron spear (17:7). It was not long, however, before Israel learned the use of iron (2 Sm 12:31; 23:7). Evidently, by Solomon’s time, iron was widely used, because builders of the temple were forbidden to use iron tools (1 Kgs 6:7). The false prophet Zedekiah in Ahab’s day used the horns of iron to thrust toward Syria as he spoke of their defeat (22:11).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet Isaiah in the eighth century <span>BC<\/span> referred to iron (Is 10:34), and Jeremiah later spoke of the metal in several places (Jer 1:18; 6:28; 11:4; 15:12; 17:1; 28:13-14). Ezekiel made use of an iron plate in one of his symbolic actions (Ez 4:3), referred to iron in his description of smelting (22:18, 20), and listed it as a commodity for trade (27:12, 19). The prophet Amos spoke of threshing instruments of iron (Am 1:3). Micah used iron as a symbol for military might (Mi 4:13). The book of Daniel makes several references to it (Dn 2:33-35, 40-45; 4:15, 23; 7:7, 19).<\/p>\n<p>By Roman times, iron weapons were the regular implements of war. Gates of iron were used to close prisons (Acts 12:10), and in a symbolic usage powerful rulers were said to rule with a rod of iron (Rv 2:27; 9:9; 12:5; 19:15). The term “iron” was used also in some metaphorical expressions. The smelting of iron was a symbol of testing and suffering (Dt 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:51; Jer 11:4; Ez 22:18), a pillar of iron was symbolic of strength (Jer 1:18), and an iron rod of harsh rule (Ps 2:9; Rv 2:27; 12:5; 19:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Coppersmith; Goldsmith; Ironsmith; Mason, Masonry; Silversmith; Stones, Precious.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MINERALS* AND METALS A “mineral” is a naturally occurring substance, normally an ore that must be mined and treated before the metal can be extracted. A “metal” is a chemical element such as iron or copper, which is free from contamination by other materials. Metals in a pure form generally do not occur in nature, though there are exceptions. In Palestine, mining and smelting are ancient arts, practiced long before the Israelites arrived. The quarrying of suitable stones, such as flint, for t...","summary_en":"MINERALS* AND METALS A “mineral” is a naturally occurring substance, normally an ore that must be mined and treated before the metal can be extracted. A “metal” is a chemical element such as iron or copper, which is free from contamination by other materials. Metals in a pure form generally do not occur in nature, though there are exceptions. In Palestine, mining and smelting are ancient arts, practiced long before the Israelites arrived. The quarrying of suitable stones, such as flint, for t...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35397,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Silversmith","title_en":"Silversmith","content_ro":"<h3>SILVERSMITH<\/h3>\n<p>One who refined silver-bearing ore and then cast it or beat it into the desired shape. Silversmiths produced musical instruments like trumpets (Nm 10:2), bases on which the frame of the tabernacle rested (Ex 26:19-25), and objects for use in the tabernacle and temple (Nm 7:13-85), as well as ornaments for private use. Silversmiths also made religious statues for false worship (Ex 20:23; Jgs 17:4). The silversmith Demetrius (Acts 19:24) made silver shrines for Artemis at Ephesus. The profession was well known in NT times (2 Tm 2:20; Rv 9:20).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SILVERSMITH<\/h3>\n<p>One who refined silver-bearing ore and then cast it or beat it into the desired shape. Silversmiths produced musical instruments like trumpets (Nm 10:2), bases on which the frame of the tabernacle rested (Ex 26:19-25), and objects for use in the tabernacle and temple (Nm 7:13-85), as well as ornaments for private use. Silversmiths also made religious statues for false worship (Ex 20:23; Jgs 17:4). The silversmith Demetrius (Acts 19:24) made silver shrines for Artemis at Ephesus. The profession was well known in NT times (2 Tm 2:20; Rv 9:20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SILVERSMITH One who refined silver-bearing ore and then cast it or beat it into the desired shape. Silversmiths produced musical instruments like trumpets (Nm 10:2), bases on which the frame of the tabernacle rested (Ex 26:19-25), and objects for use in the tabernacle and temple (Nm 7:13-85), as well as ornaments for private use. Silversmiths also made religious statues for false worship (Ex 20:23; Jgs 17:4). The silversmith Demetrius (Acts 19:24) made silver shrines for Artemis at Ephesus. T...","summary_en":"SILVERSMITH One who refined silver-bearing ore and then cast it or beat it into the desired shape. Silversmiths produced musical instruments like trumpets (Nm 10:2), bases on which the frame of the tabernacle rested (Ex 26:19-25), and objects for use in the tabernacle and temple (Nm 7:13-85), as well as ornaments for private use. Silversmiths also made religious statues for false worship (Ex 20:23; Jgs 17:4). The silversmith Demetrius (Acts 19:24) made silver shrines for Artemis at Ephesus. T...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":1158,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Altar","title_en":"Altar","content_ro":"<h3>ALTAR<\/h3>\n<p>The platform upon which offerings are made to the deity. This may include a ritual sacrifice of animals or a burning of incense before God (Ex 30:1-10). The Hebrew word for altar and the verb “to slaughter” both derive from the same root word; they are terms used in connection with the ritual of sacrificing animals to God as a covering for sin. The Greek terms also point to sacrificing animals. The practice was not peculiar to Israel but was widely known in the ancient Middle East. Israel’s immediate neighbors, the Canaanites, had their own altars and rituals. The altar was always a raised-up place.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible refers to several altars built by the patriarchs. Noah offered burnt offerings (Gn 8:20). Abraham built an altar at Shechem (Gn 12:7), another at Bethel (Gn 12:8), and one on Mt Moriah (Gn 22:9). Isaac built an altar at Beersheba (Gn 26:25), and Jacob at Shechem (Gn 33:20) and Bethel (Gn 35:7). Moses built one at Rephidim (Ex 17:15) and another at Horeb (Ex 24:4). In each case the altar was erected to commemorate an event in which God had helped the offerer.<\/p>\n<p>Two altars were used in the tabernacle. One, measuring 5 by 5 by 3 cubits (7.5 by 7.5 by 4.5 feet; 2.3 by 2.3 by 1.4 meters), was made of acacia wood overlaid with bronze and used for burnt offerings (Ex 27:1-8; 38:1-7). The other, smaller one, the golden altar, was about 18 inches (45 centimeters) square and 3 feet (90 centimeters) high, and was used to burn incense before the veil (Ex 30:1-10; 40:5).<\/p>\n<p>In Exodus 20:24-26, instructions were given to Israel to make an altar of earth or of unhewn stones, upon which burnt offerings and peace offerings were to be made in every place where God caused his name to dwell. This very general prescription seems to have allowed various individuals to erect an altar from time to time. Joshua built an altar on Mt Ebal (Jos 8:30-31); the Reubenites, Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh built one in Transjordan (Jos 22:10-16); Gideon built one in Ophrah (Jgs 6:24); the family of David in Bethlehem (1 Sm 20:6, 29); David at the threshing floor of Araunah (2 Sm 24:25); and Elijah on Mt Carmel (1 Kgs 18:30). Apart from Elijah’s altar these all predated Solomon’s temple.<\/p>\n<p>There were two altars in Solomon’s temple. One was 20 cubits square (about 25 feet; 7.6 meters) and 10 cubits high (about 12.5 feet; 3.8 meters). It was made of bronze and used for burnt offerings. It remained the center of temple worship until the temple was destroyed, although in the days of King Ahaz it was removed from its place to the northern side of the temple at the command of the Assyrian ruler Tiglath-pileser (2 Kgs 16:14). It was later restored to its proper place by Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:18). The second, the incense altar, stood in front of the veil. It was made of cedar and overlaid with gold (1 Kgs 6:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>During the exile, when the temple lay in ruins, Ezekiel had a vision of the restored temple in Jerusalem. There was an elaborate altar of burnt offering, rising in three terraces to a height of 10 cubits (17.5 feet; 5.3 meters) and resting on a base about 20 cubits (35 feet; 10.6 meters) square. Although the altar was visionary, it emphasized the need for atonement in Israel (Ez 43:13-17). No reference is made to an incense altar.<\/p>\n<p>Zerubbabel built an altar of burnt offerings (Ezr 3:2) that Antiochus Epiphanes desecrated with a “desolating sacrilege,” probably an image of Zeus (1 Macc 1:54). There was also an altar of incense. Antiochus Epiphanes carried off the golden altar (1 Macc 1:21) in 169 <span>BC<\/span>. Both were later restored by Judas Maccabeus (1 Macc 4:44-49).<\/p>\n\n<p>In Christian worship no altar was required, since in the death of Jesus Christ the final sacrifice for sin had been made. There are numerous references to both the altar of burnt offering in the temple (Mt 5:23-24; 23:18-20, 35; Lk 11:51; 1 Cor 9:13; 10:18; Heb 7:13; Rv 11:1) and the altar of incense, both in the earthly temple (Lk 1:11) and in the heavenly temple (Rv 6:9; 8:5; 9:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ALTAR<\/h3>\n<p>The platform upon which offerings are made to the deity. This may include a ritual sacrifice of animals or a burning of incense before God (Ex 30:1-10). The Hebrew word for altar and the verb “to slaughter” both derive from the same root word; they are terms used in connection with the ritual of sacrificing animals to God as a covering for sin. The Greek terms also point to sacrificing animals. The practice was not peculiar to Israel but was widely known in the ancient Middle East. Israel’s immediate neighbors, the Canaanites, had their own altars and rituals. The altar was always a raised-up place.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible refers to several altars built by the patriarchs. Noah offered burnt offerings (Gn 8:20). Abraham built an altar at Shechem (Gn 12:7), another at Bethel (Gn 12:8), and one on Mt Moriah (Gn 22:9). Isaac built an altar at Beersheba (Gn 26:25), and Jacob at Shechem (Gn 33:20) and Bethel (Gn 35:7). Moses built one at Rephidim (Ex 17:15) and another at Horeb (Ex 24:4). In each case the altar was erected to commemorate an event in which God had helped the offerer.<\/p>\n<p>Two altars were used in the tabernacle. One, measuring 5 by 5 by 3 cubits (7.5 by 7.5 by 4.5 feet; 2.3 by 2.3 by 1.4 meters), was made of acacia wood overlaid with bronze and used for burnt offerings (Ex 27:1-8; 38:1-7). The other, smaller one, the golden altar, was about 18 inches (45 centimeters) square and 3 feet (90 centimeters) high, and was used to burn incense before the veil (Ex 30:1-10; 40:5).<\/p>\n<p>In Exodus 20:24-26, instructions were given to Israel to make an altar of earth or of unhewn stones, upon which burnt offerings and peace offerings were to be made in every place where God caused his name to dwell. This very general prescription seems to have allowed various individuals to erect an altar from time to time. Joshua built an altar on Mt Ebal (Jos 8:30-31); the Reubenites, Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh built one in Transjordan (Jos 22:10-16); Gideon built one in Ophrah (Jgs 6:24); the family of David in Bethlehem (1 Sm 20:6, 29); David at the threshing floor of Araunah (2 Sm 24:25); and Elijah on Mt Carmel (1 Kgs 18:30). Apart from Elijah’s altar these all predated Solomon’s temple.<\/p>\n<p>There were two altars in Solomon’s temple. One was 20 cubits square (about 25 feet; 7.6 meters) and 10 cubits high (about 12.5 feet; 3.8 meters). It was made of bronze and used for burnt offerings. It remained the center of temple worship until the temple was destroyed, although in the days of King Ahaz it was removed from its place to the northern side of the temple at the command of the Assyrian ruler Tiglath-pileser (2 Kgs 16:14). It was later restored to its proper place by Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:18). The second, the incense altar, stood in front of the veil. It was made of cedar and overlaid with gold (1 Kgs 6:20-22).<\/p>\n<p>During the exile, when the temple lay in ruins, Ezekiel had a vision of the restored temple in Jerusalem. There was an elaborate altar of burnt offering, rising in three terraces to a height of 10 cubits (17.5 feet; 5.3 meters) and resting on a base about 20 cubits (35 feet; 10.6 meters) square. Although the altar was visionary, it emphasized the need for atonement in Israel (Ez 43:13-17). No reference is made to an incense altar.<\/p>\n<p>Zerubbabel built an altar of burnt offerings (Ezr 3:2) that Antiochus Epiphanes desecrated with a “desolating sacrilege,” probably an image of Zeus (1 Macc 1:54). There was also an altar of incense. Antiochus Epiphanes carried off the golden altar (1 Macc 1:21) in 169 <span>BC<\/span>. Both were later restored by Judas Maccabeus (1 Macc 4:44-49).<\/p>\n\n<p>In Christian worship no altar was required, since in the death of Jesus Christ the final sacrifice for sin had been made. There are numerous references to both the altar of burnt offering in the temple (Mt 5:23-24; 23:18-20, 35; Lk 11:51; 1 Cor 9:13; 10:18; Heb 7:13; Rv 11:1) and the altar of incense, both in the earthly temple (Lk 1:11) and in the heavenly temple (Rv 6:9; 8:5; 9:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ALTAR The platform upon which offerings are made to the deity. This may include a ritual sacrifice of animals or a burning of incense before God (Ex 30:1-10). The Hebrew word for altar and the verb “to slaughter” both derive from the same root word; they are terms used in connection with the ritual of sacrificing animals to God as a covering for sin. The Greek terms also point to sacrificing animals. The practice was not peculiar to Israel but was widely known in the ancient Middle East. Isra...","summary_en":"ALTAR The platform upon which offerings are made to the deity. This may include a ritual sacrifice of animals or a burning of incense before God (Ex 30:1-10). The Hebrew word for altar and the verb “to slaughter” both derive from the same root word; they are terms used in connection with the ritual of sacrificing animals to God as a covering for sin. The Greek terms also point to sacrificing animals. The practice was not peculiar to Israel but was widely known in the ancient Middle East. Isra...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26779,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Naaman","title_en":"Naaman","content_ro":"<h3>NAAMAN<\/h3>\n<li>1. Grandson of Benjamin and son of Bela, who gave his name to the Naamite clan (Gn 46:21; Nm 26:38-40; 1 Chr 8:4, 7).<\/li>\n<li>2. Commanding general of the Aramean army during the reign of Ben-hadad, king of Syria (2 Kgs 5). He was held in honor by the king, evidently for his character as well as for military achievements, “but he had leprosy.” This did not exclude him from society, as it would have done in Israel (cf. Lv 13–14), but the possibility of a cure suggested by a captive Israelite girl sent Naaman, with Ben-hadad’s approval and gifts, to the court of his highly suspicious neighboring monarch (unnamed, but probably Jehoram). Elisha the prophet intervened and prescribed an unlikely mode of healing. The reluctant Naaman followed through because of the good sense of his servants, who said, “If the prophet had told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it?” Naaman confessed that the one true God is in Israel, and he returned home with two mule-loads of earth, perhaps on the assumption that this was a God who could be worshiped only on his own ground (cf. Ex 20:24). In Luke 4:27 Jesus reminds his synagogue listeners of how Naaman, a non-Israelite, was the only one of his time to be cleansed of leprosy.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>NAAMAN<\/h3>\n<li>1. Grandson of Benjamin and son of Bela, who gave his name to the Naamite clan (Gn 46:21; Nm 26:38-40; 1 Chr 8:4, 7).<\/li>\n<li>2. Commanding general of the Aramean army during the reign of Ben-hadad, king of Syria (2 Kgs 5). He was held in honor by the king, evidently for his character as well as for military achievements, “but he had leprosy.” This did not exclude him from society, as it would have done in Israel (cf. Lv 13–14), but the possibility of a cure suggested by a captive Israelite girl sent Naaman, with Ben-hadad’s approval and gifts, to the court of his highly suspicious neighboring monarch (unnamed, but probably Jehoram). Elisha the prophet intervened and prescribed an unlikely mode of healing. The reluctant Naaman followed through because of the good sense of his servants, who said, “If the prophet had told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it?” Naaman confessed that the one true God is in Israel, and he returned home with two mule-loads of earth, perhaps on the assumption that this was a God who could be worshiped only on his own ground (cf. Ex 20:24). In Luke 4:27 Jesus reminds his synagogue listeners of how Naaman, a non-Israelite, was the only one of his time to be cleansed of leprosy.<\/li>","summary_ro":"NAAMAN 1. Grandson of Benjamin and son of Bela, who gave his name to the Naamite clan (Gn 46:21; Nm 26:38-40; 1 Chr 8:4, 7). 2. Commanding general of the Aramean army during the reign of Ben-hadad, king of Syria (2 Kgs 5). He was held in honor by the king, evidently for his character as well as for military achievements, “but he had leprosy.” This did not exclude him from society, as it would have done in Israel (cf. Lv 13–14), but the possibility of a cure suggested by a captive Israelite gi...","summary_en":"NAAMAN 1. Grandson of Benjamin and son of Bela, who gave his name to the Naamite clan (Gn 46:21; Nm 26:38-40; 1 Chr 8:4, 7). 2. Commanding general of the Aramean army during the reign of Ben-hadad, king of Syria (2 Kgs 5). He was held in honor by the king, evidently for his character as well as for military achievements, “but he had leprosy.” This did not exclude him from society, as it would have done in Israel (cf. Lv 13–14), but the possibility of a cure suggested by a captive Israelite gi...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36652,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tabernacle","title_en":"Tabernacle","content_ro":"<h3>TABERNACLE<\/h3>\n<p>Place of worship during the earliest years of the history of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Names for the Tabernacle<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• The Tabernacle and Its Furniture<\/p>\n<p>• The Tabernacle Proper<\/p>\n<p>• The Outer Court and Its Furnishings<\/p>\n<p>• The Construction and Consecration of the Tabernacle<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was the precursor of the temple during most of the period between the formation of Israel at Sinai and its final establishment in the Promised Land in the early period of the monarchy. A portable sanctuary in keeping with the demand for easy mobility, it was the symbol of God’s presence with his people and, therefore, of his availability, as well as a place where his will was communicated. At an early period it was anticipated that, when peace and security had been secured, a permanent national shrine would be established (Dt 12:10-11). This was not realized until the time of Solomon, when the temple was erected (2 Sm 7:10-13; 1 Kgs 5:1-5). Historical events, as well as the similarities in construction and underlying theology, illustrate the close connection between the tabernacle and temple.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NamesfortheTabernacle\">Names for the Tabernacle<\/p>\n<p>Several words and descriptive phrases are used:<\/p>\n<p>1. “Sacred residence,” “sanctuary,“ or “holy place” (Ex 25:8; Lv 10:17-18) derive from the verb “to be holy.”<\/p>\n<li>2. “The tent” occurs 19 times and is also found in expressions such as “the tent of the testimony” (Nm 9:15), “the tent of the Lord” (1 Kgs 2:28-30), “the house of the tent” (1 Chr 9:23), and “the tent of meeting” (e.g., Ex 33:7). The last name appears approximately 130 times. The word involves the concept of meeting by appointment and designates the tabernacle as the place where God met with Moses and his people to make known his will.<\/li>\n<li>3. “Dwelling place” is the literal meaning of “tabernacle.” In Exodus 25:9 the word indicates the whole tabernacle (including the outer court), but in Exodus 26:1 it refers to the tabernacle proper (that included the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies). A variant of this is “the tabernacle of the testimony” (Ex 38:21; <span>nlt<\/span> “Tabernacle of the Covenant”), which, with other expressions like “the tent of the testimony,” stresses the presence of the two tablets of the law.<\/li>\n<li>4. “The house of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (Ex 23:19).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The three-part construction of the tabernacle, composed of a general area and two restricted areas, was not unique. In other developed religions that included an organized priesthood there were three main levels of approach: one for all members of the community; one for the priests generally; and one for the chief religious leaders, which was an inner sanctuary, conceived as the dwelling place of the deity. Excavations of heathen sanctuaries in Palestine and Syria in the pre-Israelite period have revealed this type of divided sanctuary.<\/p>\n<p>There is also widespread evidence of the use of portable, often complex, prefabricated structures during the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>, usually as either staterooms for kings and other high dignitaries, or as sanctuaries. Rulers of settled communities used these structures when traveling to other areas within their kingdoms (e.g., Egypt and, to a lesser extent, Canaan). Also, nomadic or seminomadic peoples, such as the Midianites, used portable sanctuaries. In pre-Mosaic Egypt, craftsmen used techniques similar to those used in the construction of the tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTabernacleandItsFurniture\">The Tabernacle and Its Furniture<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus (Ex 25–40) describes the tabernacle and its furnishings in detail. The materials used included items ranging from precious to common materials. Three metals are mentioned in descending order of importance: gold, copper, and silver. Gold alone was employed in the principal sanctuary furnishings. The total amount of metals used was approximately one ton (.9 metric ton) of gold, three of copper, and four of silver (38:24-31). The relatively large amount of silver came from an offering (30:11-16), which augmented the silver and gold already given by the Egyptians (12:35).<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, in God’s building specifications, the starting point was the furniture of the inner sanctuary (the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies). In the actual construction, this furniture was made after the tabernacle itself, presumably so that it could be immediately and adequately housed (Ex 25:9–27:19; cf. 36:8–37:28).<\/p>\n<p>The first item listed was the ark, the only furniture in the Holy of Holies. It was a wooden box sheathed in gold, approximately three and three-quarters feet (1.1 meters) long, with a width and height of two and a quarter feet (.7 meter). The supreme symbol of the covenant relationship between God and Israel, it was often called “the ark of the covenant of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (Dt 10:8). Unlike contemporary arks in some neighboring countries, it contained no representation of the deity, only the Ten Commandments (Ex 25:16), a jar of manna (16:33), and Aaron’s rod (Nm 17:10)—all symbolic of various aspects of God’s provision (see Heb 9:4).<\/p>\n<p>The ark was transported by two poles that passed through rings attached to each lower corner (Ex 25:13-15). These poles, left in place, projected underneath the veil into the Holy Place, serving as a reminder of the presence of the unseen ark.<\/p>\n<p>Resting upon the ark was the mercy seat (<span>nlt<\/span> “atonement cover”), a rectangular slab of solid gold, to which were attached two cherubim. The inward-looking cherubim and the mercy seat formed a throne for the invisible God (Ex 25:22), who is frequently described as enthroned above or upon the cherubim (Pss 80:1; 99:1). The noun “mercy seat” comes from a verb meaning “to make atonement.” The mercy seat was sprinkled with blood at the climax of the annual Day of Atonement (Lv 16:14). The fact that the ark was placed <em>under<\/em> the mercy seat (Ex 25:21) signifies that the law was under God’s protection and explains the references to the ark as his footstool (e.g., Ps 132:7). Like the cherubim in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:24), those in the Holy of Holies probably had a similar protective function. In the ancient world, symbolic winged creatures like the cherubim were frequently placed as guardians of thrones and important buildings.<\/p>\n<p>Like the ark, the portable table of the bread of the Presence (Ex 25:30) was made of acacia wood overlaid with gold. It was marginally smaller, with a length of three feet (.9 meter), a width of one and a half feet (.5 meter) and a height of two and a quarter feet (.7 meter). The various auxiliary vessels and implements are detailed (v 29); presumably the dishes would be used for carrying the bread. On each Sabbath day, 12 loaves, symbolizing God’s provision for the 12 tribes of Israel, were placed in two rows on the table (Lv 24:5-9). The table was located in the Holy Place, on the north side.<\/p>\n<p>On the south side was the seven-branched golden lampstand (Ex 25:31-39; 37:17-24; 40:24). It was the most impressive item of furniture in the Holy Place; like the cherubim and the mercy seat, it was made of pure gold. Six golden branches, three on either side, extended from a central shaft, and the whole lampstand was ornamented with almond flowers. From the biblical evidence, it is not clear whether the lampstand gave continuous illumination (Ex 27:20; Lv 24:2) or night light only (1 Sm 3:3 in most versions). Leviticus 24:4 strongly supports the former, and the reference in 1 Samuel probably reflects the laxity that had crept in during the period of the judges. In Scripture, the golden lampstand symbolizes the continuing witness of the covenant community (Zec 4:1-7; Rv 2:1). The precise attention to the smallest detail is well illustrated in the listing of the supplementary items, all made of pure gold, required for the servicing of the lamps. Without this precise attention, the light would soon grow dim, and the sanctuary itself be defiled by carbon deposits (Ex 25:38). Moreover, only the best-quality olive oil was used, thus ensuring the brightest possible light (27:20).<\/p>\n<p>The altar of incense (Ex 30:1-10) may have been deliberately played down to give greater prominence to the sacrificial altar in the outer court, which is frequently referred to as <em>“the<\/em> altar.” In order to distinguish the altar of incense from the bronze altar of sacrifice, the former was called “the golden altar” (40:5). The altar of incense was located in the Holy Place, immediately opposite the ark in the Holy of Holies but just outside the veil, between the table of the bread of the Presence and the lampstand. Made of acacia wood overlaid with gold, it was 18 inches (45.7 centimeters) square and 3 feet (.9 meter) high, with horns and a golden molding around the four sides. Like the ark, it was made readily portable by the provision of rings and carrying poles. The altar was used for the offering of incense every morning and evening and for anointing the horns for the yearly atonement (30:7-10). The incense from a special recipe was forbidden for secular use. Originally, incense indicated something that ascended from a sacrifice, a pleasing aroma to God. Incense acknowledged God in worship (Mal 1:11) and at an early date signified the prayers of the godly (Ps 141:2). It also concealed God from human eyes (Lv 16:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTabernacleProper\">The Tabernacle Proper<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was fundamentally a tent structure supported on a rigid framework. As with most of the other items, a triplication of detail underlines the importance of the tabernacle proper. The specifications are given in Exodus 26, the construction in Exodus 36:8-38, and the final erection in Exodus 40:16-19. The overall dimensions were approximately 45 feet (13.7 meters) long, 15 feet (4.6 meters) wide, and 15 feet high.<\/p>\n<p>The basic framework was a series of upright supports, each 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and 2½ feet (.7 meters) wide, and each standing on two silver bases (Ex 26:15-25). Scholars used to think these supports or frames were solid planks of acacia wood, but most modern scholars accept that each comprised two upright sides connected by horizontal pieces like a ladder. Such sections would be considerably stronger, would keep their shape better, and would allow a view of the beautiful inner layer of curtains from within the sanctuary. On the south and north sides were 20 such frames, with 6 more at the western end. In addition, on the western side were two corner pieces to which all the walls were attached by clasps (vv 23-25). A series of bars, which passed through gold rings attached to each upright frame, provided further security and alignment (vv 26-29). There were five such bars on each of the three sides. The central one on both the south and the north sides extended the entire length; the other four probably extended halfway, so that each frame was effectively secured by three bars. All the wooden sections were sheathed in gold.<\/p>\n<p>Over this framework several layers of coverings formed the top, sides, and back of the tabernacle. The first layer of ten linen curtains was dyed blue, purple, and scarlet, and embroidered with cherubim (Ex 26:1-6; 36:8-13). Each measured 42 feet by 6 feet (12.8 meters by 1.8 meters). Pairs joined along their length formed five sets of curtains. The two large curtains were themselves attached with 50 golden clasps that passed through a similar number of loops in each. Probably the curtains were stretched over the structure like a tablecloth.<\/p>\n<p>Eleven curtains or tarpaulins of goat hair, each 45 feet by 6 feet (13.7 meters by 1.8 meters), formed the next layer. These were divided into two sets by joining together five and six curtains respectively, and were linked using a similar method as the under curtain, except that bronze clasps instead of gold were used. The extra length of the goat-hair tarpaulins provided an overlap to protect the under curtain, and the larger tarpaulin overlapped at both the front and the rear of the tabernacle (Ex 26:7-9, 12-13). Two further layers ensured complete weatherproofing, one of ram’s skins dyed red and one of goatskins.<\/p>\n<p>A veil made of the same material as the under curtaining divided the sanctuary and hung under the golden clasps that joined the two curtains, supported by four pillars of acacia wood plated with gold and resting in silver bases. The cherubim on both the veil and the curtains were symbolic guardians of the sanctuary. The positioning of the veil made the Holy of Holies a perfect cube of 15 feet (4.6 meters). The layers of overlapping material and the attention given to the joints emphasizes the darkness of the innermost shrine. God was surrounded by darkness, carefully isolated from any unauthorized sight (Ps 97:2). The Holy Place occupied an area 30 feet by 15 feet (9.1 meters by 4.6 meters), exactly twice the area of the Holy of Holies. A screen made from the same fabric as the main curtain stood between the Holy Place and the outer court and hung from golden hooks on five posts of acacia wood, overlaid with gold and resting on bronze sockets. There is no mention of embroidered seraphim on this section, which formed the tabernacle’s eastern wall.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle, while probably having a somewhat squat appearance suggestive of strength, could be easily dismantled, transported, and reassembled. By the standards of that age, it was a fit dwelling place for God, constructed by the best human skills and the highest quality materials.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheOuterCourtandItsFurnishings\">The Outer Court and Its Furnishings<\/p>\n<p>The court of the tabernacle was a rectangle 150 feet (45.7 meters) long on the north and south sides and 75 feet (22.9 meters) wide on the east and west (Ex 27:9-18; 38:9-19). The tabernacle itself was at the western end. Curtains of fine-twined linen 7½ feet (2.3 meters) high screened the entire tabernacle area. In the eastern section, there was a central entrance, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide. An embroidered curtain of the same height screened this doorway, which was probably recessed to facilitate entrance on either side. Silver rods supported all the curtains. These rods passed through silver hooks attached to the silver-plated posts that rested on bronze bases (38:17).<\/p>\n<p>The altar of burnt offering (Ex 27:1-8; 38:1-7), at the eastern end of the court adjacent to the entrance (40:29), was a reminder that there could be no approach to God except by the place of sacrifice. Seven feet (2.1 meters) square and four and a half feet (1.4 meters) high, it was small in comparison to the gigantic altar in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 4:1). Basically, it was a hollow wooden framework overlaid with bronze, light enough to be carried on bronze-plated poles that passed through bronze rings at each corner. The grating (Ex 27:4-5) was probably inside the altar at the middle, although some scholars believe that it extended around the lower, outer sides of the altar, to provide draft and to allow the sacrificial blood to flow to the base of the altar. The horns, possibly symbolizing the sacrificial victims, could be used to tether the animals about to be sacrificed. In Israel, a person could claim sanctuary by clinging to the horns of the altar (e.g., 1 Kgs 1:50), with the possible symbolism that he was offering himself as a sacrifice to God and so claiming his protection. The lower part of the altar may have been partly filled with earth to absorb the blood (Ex 20:24). All the accessories were bronze: ash buckets, shovels for removing the ashes and filling the base with earth, basins for the blood, carcass hooks, and fire pans (27:3).<\/p>\n<p>No specifications concerning the size of the laver (<span>nlt<\/span> “washbasin”) have survived (Ex 30:17-20; 38:8). It was made from the mirrors of the women who served at the entrance to the court. The laver stood between the altar of sacrifice and the tabernacle. Failure to wash at the laver prior to ministering was punishable by death—a solemn reminder of the need for cleanliness and obedience before undertaking any task for God. The bronze pedestal may have been merely a support for the laver, but possibly it incorporated a lower basin in which the priests could wash their feet.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheConstructionandConsecrationoftheTabernacle\">The Construction and Consecration of the Tabernacle<\/p>\n<p>The God-given specifications required skills beyond the capabilities of Moses and Aaron. Prominent in the construction were Bezalel and Oholiab (Ex 30:1-11), with a large supporting group of experts, who must have learned their craftsmanship in Egypt. In a remarkable community effort, the Israelites gave so generously that the flow of gifts had to be stopped (35:20-24; 36:4-7). In addition, many gave of their special skills (35:25-29).<\/p>\n<p>When all the items had been completed and placed in position (Ex 40:1-33), every piece except the mercy seat and the cherubim was anointed with special oil (30:22-33; 40:9-11) and symbolically consecrated for its particular function. The climax came when the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle (40:34). He came to be present among his people, and thereafter the cloud by day and fire by night provided reassurance concerning his presence and guidance. Yet there could be no laxity in approaching him, and even Moses was excluded from the Holy of Holies. The tabernacle was erected exactly one year after the deliverance from Egypt and a mere nine months after the Sinai revelation.<\/p>\n<p>Thereafter, when Israel camped, the Levites surrounded the tabernacle on three sides (Nm 1:53), with the families of Moses and Aaron occupying the remaining eastern side (Nm 3:14-38). This prevented any unauthorized intrusion into the sacred area. When the tabernacle was moved, the dismantlement was carefully regulated (4:5-15). The Kohathites were responsible for transporting the more sacred items, using the carrying poles; the Gershonites dealt with all the soft furnishings, the altar of sacrifice, and its accessories; and the Merarites carried the hard furnishings, such as the frames, bars, and bases. Even on the march, the tabernacle remained central, with six tribes preceding and the remaining six following (Nm 2).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TABERNACLE<\/h3>\n<p>Place of worship during the earliest years of the history of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Names for the Tabernacle<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• The Tabernacle and Its Furniture<\/p>\n<p>• The Tabernacle Proper<\/p>\n<p>• The Outer Court and Its Furnishings<\/p>\n<p>• The Construction and Consecration of the Tabernacle<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was the precursor of the temple during most of the period between the formation of Israel at Sinai and its final establishment in the Promised Land in the early period of the monarchy. A portable sanctuary in keeping with the demand for easy mobility, it was the symbol of God’s presence with his people and, therefore, of his availability, as well as a place where his will was communicated. At an early period it was anticipated that, when peace and security had been secured, a permanent national shrine would be established (Dt 12:10-11). This was not realized until the time of Solomon, when the temple was erected (2 Sm 7:10-13; 1 Kgs 5:1-5). Historical events, as well as the similarities in construction and underlying theology, illustrate the close connection between the tabernacle and temple.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NamesfortheTabernacle\">Names for the Tabernacle<\/p>\n<p>Several words and descriptive phrases are used:<\/p>\n<p>1. “Sacred residence,” “sanctuary,“ or “holy place” (Ex 25:8; Lv 10:17-18) derive from the verb “to be holy.”<\/p>\n<li>2. “The tent” occurs 19 times and is also found in expressions such as “the tent of the testimony” (Nm 9:15), “the tent of the Lord” (1 Kgs 2:28-30), “the house of the tent” (1 Chr 9:23), and “the tent of meeting” (e.g., Ex 33:7). The last name appears approximately 130 times. The word involves the concept of meeting by appointment and designates the tabernacle as the place where God met with Moses and his people to make known his will.<\/li>\n<li>3. “Dwelling place” is the literal meaning of “tabernacle.” In Exodus 25:9 the word indicates the whole tabernacle (including the outer court), but in Exodus 26:1 it refers to the tabernacle proper (that included the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies). A variant of this is “the tabernacle of the testimony” (Ex 38:21; <span>nlt<\/span> “Tabernacle of the Covenant”), which, with other expressions like “the tent of the testimony,” stresses the presence of the two tablets of the law.<\/li>\n<li>4. “The house of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (Ex 23:19).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The three-part construction of the tabernacle, composed of a general area and two restricted areas, was not unique. In other developed religions that included an organized priesthood there were three main levels of approach: one for all members of the community; one for the priests generally; and one for the chief religious leaders, which was an inner sanctuary, conceived as the dwelling place of the deity. Excavations of heathen sanctuaries in Palestine and Syria in the pre-Israelite period have revealed this type of divided sanctuary.<\/p>\n<p>There is also widespread evidence of the use of portable, often complex, prefabricated structures during the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>, usually as either staterooms for kings and other high dignitaries, or as sanctuaries. Rulers of settled communities used these structures when traveling to other areas within their kingdoms (e.g., Egypt and, to a lesser extent, Canaan). Also, nomadic or seminomadic peoples, such as the Midianites, used portable sanctuaries. In pre-Mosaic Egypt, craftsmen used techniques similar to those used in the construction of the tabernacle.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTabernacleandItsFurniture\">The Tabernacle and Its Furniture<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus (Ex 25–40) describes the tabernacle and its furnishings in detail. The materials used included items ranging from precious to common materials. Three metals are mentioned in descending order of importance: gold, copper, and silver. Gold alone was employed in the principal sanctuary furnishings. The total amount of metals used was approximately one ton (.9 metric ton) of gold, three of copper, and four of silver (38:24-31). The relatively large amount of silver came from an offering (30:11-16), which augmented the silver and gold already given by the Egyptians (12:35).<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, in God’s building specifications, the starting point was the furniture of the inner sanctuary (the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies). In the actual construction, this furniture was made after the tabernacle itself, presumably so that it could be immediately and adequately housed (Ex 25:9–27:19; cf. 36:8–37:28).<\/p>\n<p>The first item listed was the ark, the only furniture in the Holy of Holies. It was a wooden box sheathed in gold, approximately three and three-quarters feet (1.1 meters) long, with a width and height of two and a quarter feet (.7 meter). The supreme symbol of the covenant relationship between God and Israel, it was often called “the ark of the covenant of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (Dt 10:8). Unlike contemporary arks in some neighboring countries, it contained no representation of the deity, only the Ten Commandments (Ex 25:16), a jar of manna (16:33), and Aaron’s rod (Nm 17:10)—all symbolic of various aspects of God’s provision (see Heb 9:4).<\/p>\n<p>The ark was transported by two poles that passed through rings attached to each lower corner (Ex 25:13-15). These poles, left in place, projected underneath the veil into the Holy Place, serving as a reminder of the presence of the unseen ark.<\/p>\n<p>Resting upon the ark was the mercy seat (<span>nlt<\/span> “atonement cover”), a rectangular slab of solid gold, to which were attached two cherubim. The inward-looking cherubim and the mercy seat formed a throne for the invisible God (Ex 25:22), who is frequently described as enthroned above or upon the cherubim (Pss 80:1; 99:1). The noun “mercy seat” comes from a verb meaning “to make atonement.” The mercy seat was sprinkled with blood at the climax of the annual Day of Atonement (Lv 16:14). The fact that the ark was placed <em>under<\/em> the mercy seat (Ex 25:21) signifies that the law was under God’s protection and explains the references to the ark as his footstool (e.g., Ps 132:7). Like the cherubim in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:24), those in the Holy of Holies probably had a similar protective function. In the ancient world, symbolic winged creatures like the cherubim were frequently placed as guardians of thrones and important buildings.<\/p>\n<p>Like the ark, the portable table of the bread of the Presence (Ex 25:30) was made of acacia wood overlaid with gold. It was marginally smaller, with a length of three feet (.9 meter), a width of one and a half feet (.5 meter) and a height of two and a quarter feet (.7 meter). The various auxiliary vessels and implements are detailed (v 29); presumably the dishes would be used for carrying the bread. On each Sabbath day, 12 loaves, symbolizing God’s provision for the 12 tribes of Israel, were placed in two rows on the table (Lv 24:5-9). The table was located in the Holy Place, on the north side.<\/p>\n<p>On the south side was the seven-branched golden lampstand (Ex 25:31-39; 37:17-24; 40:24). It was the most impressive item of furniture in the Holy Place; like the cherubim and the mercy seat, it was made of pure gold. Six golden branches, three on either side, extended from a central shaft, and the whole lampstand was ornamented with almond flowers. From the biblical evidence, it is not clear whether the lampstand gave continuous illumination (Ex 27:20; Lv 24:2) or night light only (1 Sm 3:3 in most versions). Leviticus 24:4 strongly supports the former, and the reference in 1 Samuel probably reflects the laxity that had crept in during the period of the judges. In Scripture, the golden lampstand symbolizes the continuing witness of the covenant community (Zec 4:1-7; Rv 2:1). The precise attention to the smallest detail is well illustrated in the listing of the supplementary items, all made of pure gold, required for the servicing of the lamps. Without this precise attention, the light would soon grow dim, and the sanctuary itself be defiled by carbon deposits (Ex 25:38). Moreover, only the best-quality olive oil was used, thus ensuring the brightest possible light (27:20).<\/p>\n<p>The altar of incense (Ex 30:1-10) may have been deliberately played down to give greater prominence to the sacrificial altar in the outer court, which is frequently referred to as <em>“the<\/em> altar.” In order to distinguish the altar of incense from the bronze altar of sacrifice, the former was called “the golden altar” (40:5). The altar of incense was located in the Holy Place, immediately opposite the ark in the Holy of Holies but just outside the veil, between the table of the bread of the Presence and the lampstand. Made of acacia wood overlaid with gold, it was 18 inches (45.7 centimeters) square and 3 feet (.9 meter) high, with horns and a golden molding around the four sides. Like the ark, it was made readily portable by the provision of rings and carrying poles. The altar was used for the offering of incense every morning and evening and for anointing the horns for the yearly atonement (30:7-10). The incense from a special recipe was forbidden for secular use. Originally, incense indicated something that ascended from a sacrifice, a pleasing aroma to God. Incense acknowledged God in worship (Mal 1:11) and at an early date signified the prayers of the godly (Ps 141:2). It also concealed God from human eyes (Lv 16:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTabernacleProper\">The Tabernacle Proper<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle was fundamentally a tent structure supported on a rigid framework. As with most of the other items, a triplication of detail underlines the importance of the tabernacle proper. The specifications are given in Exodus 26, the construction in Exodus 36:8-38, and the final erection in Exodus 40:16-19. The overall dimensions were approximately 45 feet (13.7 meters) long, 15 feet (4.6 meters) wide, and 15 feet high.<\/p>\n<p>The basic framework was a series of upright supports, each 15 feet (4.6 meters) high and 2½ feet (.7 meters) wide, and each standing on two silver bases (Ex 26:15-25). Scholars used to think these supports or frames were solid planks of acacia wood, but most modern scholars accept that each comprised two upright sides connected by horizontal pieces like a ladder. Such sections would be considerably stronger, would keep their shape better, and would allow a view of the beautiful inner layer of curtains from within the sanctuary. On the south and north sides were 20 such frames, with 6 more at the western end. In addition, on the western side were two corner pieces to which all the walls were attached by clasps (vv 23-25). A series of bars, which passed through gold rings attached to each upright frame, provided further security and alignment (vv 26-29). There were five such bars on each of the three sides. The central one on both the south and the north sides extended the entire length; the other four probably extended halfway, so that each frame was effectively secured by three bars. All the wooden sections were sheathed in gold.<\/p>\n<p>Over this framework several layers of coverings formed the top, sides, and back of the tabernacle. The first layer of ten linen curtains was dyed blue, purple, and scarlet, and embroidered with cherubim (Ex 26:1-6; 36:8-13). Each measured 42 feet by 6 feet (12.8 meters by 1.8 meters). Pairs joined along their length formed five sets of curtains. The two large curtains were themselves attached with 50 golden clasps that passed through a similar number of loops in each. Probably the curtains were stretched over the structure like a tablecloth.<\/p>\n<p>Eleven curtains or tarpaulins of goat hair, each 45 feet by 6 feet (13.7 meters by 1.8 meters), formed the next layer. These were divided into two sets by joining together five and six curtains respectively, and were linked using a similar method as the under curtain, except that bronze clasps instead of gold were used. The extra length of the goat-hair tarpaulins provided an overlap to protect the under curtain, and the larger tarpaulin overlapped at both the front and the rear of the tabernacle (Ex 26:7-9, 12-13). Two further layers ensured complete weatherproofing, one of ram’s skins dyed red and one of goatskins.<\/p>\n<p>A veil made of the same material as the under curtaining divided the sanctuary and hung under the golden clasps that joined the two curtains, supported by four pillars of acacia wood plated with gold and resting in silver bases. The cherubim on both the veil and the curtains were symbolic guardians of the sanctuary. The positioning of the veil made the Holy of Holies a perfect cube of 15 feet (4.6 meters). The layers of overlapping material and the attention given to the joints emphasizes the darkness of the innermost shrine. God was surrounded by darkness, carefully isolated from any unauthorized sight (Ps 97:2). The Holy Place occupied an area 30 feet by 15 feet (9.1 meters by 4.6 meters), exactly twice the area of the Holy of Holies. A screen made from the same fabric as the main curtain stood between the Holy Place and the outer court and hung from golden hooks on five posts of acacia wood, overlaid with gold and resting on bronze sockets. There is no mention of embroidered seraphim on this section, which formed the tabernacle’s eastern wall.<\/p>\n<p>The tabernacle, while probably having a somewhat squat appearance suggestive of strength, could be easily dismantled, transported, and reassembled. By the standards of that age, it was a fit dwelling place for God, constructed by the best human skills and the highest quality materials.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheOuterCourtandItsFurnishings\">The Outer Court and Its Furnishings<\/p>\n<p>The court of the tabernacle was a rectangle 150 feet (45.7 meters) long on the north and south sides and 75 feet (22.9 meters) wide on the east and west (Ex 27:9-18; 38:9-19). The tabernacle itself was at the western end. Curtains of fine-twined linen 7½ feet (2.3 meters) high screened the entire tabernacle area. In the eastern section, there was a central entrance, 30 feet (9.1 meters) wide. An embroidered curtain of the same height screened this doorway, which was probably recessed to facilitate entrance on either side. Silver rods supported all the curtains. These rods passed through silver hooks attached to the silver-plated posts that rested on bronze bases (38:17).<\/p>\n<p>The altar of burnt offering (Ex 27:1-8; 38:1-7), at the eastern end of the court adjacent to the entrance (40:29), was a reminder that there could be no approach to God except by the place of sacrifice. Seven feet (2.1 meters) square and four and a half feet (1.4 meters) high, it was small in comparison to the gigantic altar in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 4:1). Basically, it was a hollow wooden framework overlaid with bronze, light enough to be carried on bronze-plated poles that passed through bronze rings at each corner. The grating (Ex 27:4-5) was probably inside the altar at the middle, although some scholars believe that it extended around the lower, outer sides of the altar, to provide draft and to allow the sacrificial blood to flow to the base of the altar. The horns, possibly symbolizing the sacrificial victims, could be used to tether the animals about to be sacrificed. In Israel, a person could claim sanctuary by clinging to the horns of the altar (e.g., 1 Kgs 1:50), with the possible symbolism that he was offering himself as a sacrifice to God and so claiming his protection. The lower part of the altar may have been partly filled with earth to absorb the blood (Ex 20:24). All the accessories were bronze: ash buckets, shovels for removing the ashes and filling the base with earth, basins for the blood, carcass hooks, and fire pans (27:3).<\/p>\n<p>No specifications concerning the size of the laver (<span>nlt<\/span> “washbasin”) have survived (Ex 30:17-20; 38:8). It was made from the mirrors of the women who served at the entrance to the court. The laver stood between the altar of sacrifice and the tabernacle. Failure to wash at the laver prior to ministering was punishable by death—a solemn reminder of the need for cleanliness and obedience before undertaking any task for God. The bronze pedestal may have been merely a support for the laver, but possibly it incorporated a lower basin in which the priests could wash their feet.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheConstructionandConsecrationoftheTabernacle\">The Construction and Consecration of the Tabernacle<\/p>\n<p>The God-given specifications required skills beyond the capabilities of Moses and Aaron. Prominent in the construction were Bezalel and Oholiab (Ex 30:1-11), with a large supporting group of experts, who must have learned their craftsmanship in Egypt. In a remarkable community effort, the Israelites gave so generously that the flow of gifts had to be stopped (35:20-24; 36:4-7). In addition, many gave of their special skills (35:25-29).<\/p>\n<p>When all the items had been completed and placed in position (Ex 40:1-33), every piece except the mercy seat and the cherubim was anointed with special oil (30:22-33; 40:9-11) and symbolically consecrated for its particular function. The climax came when the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle (40:34). He came to be present among his people, and thereafter the cloud by day and fire by night provided reassurance concerning his presence and guidance. Yet there could be no laxity in approaching him, and even Moses was excluded from the Holy of Holies. The tabernacle was erected exactly one year after the deliverance from Egypt and a mere nine months after the Sinai revelation.<\/p>\n<p>Thereafter, when Israel camped, the Levites surrounded the tabernacle on three sides (Nm 1:53), with the families of Moses and Aaron occupying the remaining eastern side (Nm 3:14-38). This prevented any unauthorized intrusion into the sacred area. When the tabernacle was moved, the dismantlement was carefully regulated (4:5-15). The Kohathites were responsible for transporting the more sacred items, using the carrying poles; the Gershonites dealt with all the soft furnishings, the altar of sacrifice, and its accessories; and the Merarites carried the hard furnishings, such as the frames, bars, and bases. Even on the march, the tabernacle remained central, with six tribes preceding and the remaining six following (Nm 2).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TABERNACLE Place of worship during the earliest years of the history of Israel. Preview • Introduction • Names for the Tabernacle • Background • The Tabernacle and Its Furniture • The Tabernacle Proper • The Outer Court and Its Furnishings • The Construction and Consecration of the Tabernacle Introduction The tabernacle was the precursor of the temple during most of the period between the formation of Israel at Sinai and its final establishment in the Promised Land in the early period of the ...","summary_en":"TABERNACLE Place of worship during the earliest years of the history of Israel. Preview • Introduction • Names for the Tabernacle • Background • The Tabernacle and Its Furniture • The Tabernacle Proper • The Outer Court and Its Furnishings • The Construction and Consecration of the Tabernacle Introduction The tabernacle was the precursor of the temple during most of the period between the formation of Israel at Sinai and its final establishment in the Promised Land in the early period of the ...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":59970,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Altars","title_en":"Altars","content_ro":"<h3>Altars<\/h3>\n<p>The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Intended as a memorial or a place for sacrifice, an altar was the most common image of worship in the Old Testament and in the wider ancient world. The typical altar was on a raised platform accessed by a ramp or stairway; this elevated the sacrificial worship toward heaven. The four horns on the corners of many altars (see Exod 27:2) marked off the sacred space of meeting between divine and human realms. Through sacrifice and burning, the offering was transferred from the visible to the invisible world.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus unites the various aspects of the altar imagery in himself as high priest, sacrificial lamb, and altar (see Heb 4:14-15; 7:24, 27; 9:14, 26; 10:10; 13:10, 12). Jesus anticipated his own sacrifice in his reference to the blood of martyrs (see Matt 23:35; Luke 11:50-51), and the cross serves as the final altar. Thus, the enthroned Lamb in Revelation removes the need for temple and altar (Rev 21:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20-21; 12:7-8; 22:9-14; 33:20; Exod 20:24-26; Josh 22:10-34; 1 Kgs 18:20-40; Hos 8:11-13; Matt 5:23-24; Heb 13:10-14; Rev 6:9; 8:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Altars<\/h3>\n<p>The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Intended as a memorial or a place for sacrifice, an altar was the most common image of worship in the Old Testament and in the wider ancient world. The typical altar was on a raised platform accessed by a ramp or stairway; this elevated the sacrificial worship toward heaven. The four horns on the corners of many altars (see Exod 27:2) marked off the sacred space of meeting between divine and human realms. Through sacrifice and burning, the offering was transferred from the visible to the invisible world.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus unites the various aspects of the altar imagery in himself as high priest, sacrificial lamb, and altar (see Heb 4:14-15; 7:24, 27; 9:14, 26; 10:10; 13:10, 12). Jesus anticipated his own sacrifice in his reference to the blood of martyrs (see Matt 23:35; Luke 11:50-51), and the cross serves as the final altar. Thus, the enthroned Lamb in Revelation removes the need for temple and altar (Rev 21:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20-21; 12:7-8; 22:9-14; 33:20; Exod 20:24-26; Josh 22:10-34; 1 Kgs 18:20-40; Hos 8:11-13; Matt 5:23-24; Heb 13:10-14; Rev 6:9; 8:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Altars The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Int...","summary_en":"Altars The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Int...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87596,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Altars","title_en":"Altars","content_ro":"<h3>Altars<\/h3>\n<p>The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Intended as a memorial or a place for sacrifice, an altar was the most common image of worship in the Old Testament and in the wider ancient world. The typical altar was on a raised platform accessed by a ramp or stairway; this elevated the sacrificial worship toward heaven. The four horns on the corners of many altars (see Exod 27:2) marked off the sacred space of meeting between divine and human realms. Through sacrifice and burning, the offering was transferred from the visible to the invisible world.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus unites the various aspects of the altar imagery in himself as high priest, sacrificial lamb, and altar (see Heb 4:14-15; 7:24, 27; 9:14, 26; 10:10; 13:10, 12). Jesus anticipated his own sacrifice in his reference to the blood of martyrs (see Matt 23:35; Luke 11:50-51), and the cross serves as the final altar. Thus, the enthroned Lamb in Revelation removes the need for temple and altar (Rev 21:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20-21; 12:7-8; 22:9-14; 33:20; Exod 20:24-26; Josh 22:10-34; 1 Kgs 18:20-40; Hos 8:11-13; Matt 5:23-24; Heb 13:10-14; Rev 6:9; 8:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Altars<\/h3>\n<p>The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Intended as a memorial or a place for sacrifice, an altar was the most common image of worship in the Old Testament and in the wider ancient world. The typical altar was on a raised platform accessed by a ramp or stairway; this elevated the sacrificial worship toward heaven. The four horns on the corners of many altars (see Exod 27:2) marked off the sacred space of meeting between divine and human realms. Through sacrifice and burning, the offering was transferred from the visible to the invisible world.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus unites the various aspects of the altar imagery in himself as high priest, sacrificial lamb, and altar (see Heb 4:14-15; 7:24, 27; 9:14, 26; 10:10; 13:10, 12). Jesus anticipated his own sacrifice in his reference to the blood of martyrs (see Matt 23:35; Luke 11:50-51), and the cross serves as the final altar. Thus, the enthroned Lamb in Revelation removes the need for temple and altar (Rev 21:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20-21; 12:7-8; 22:9-14; 33:20; Exod 20:24-26; Josh 22:10-34; 1 Kgs 18:20-40; Hos 8:11-13; Matt 5:23-24; Heb 13:10-14; Rev 6:9; 8:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Altars The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Int...","summary_en":"Altars The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Int...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115222,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Altars","title_en":"Altars","content_ro":"<h3>Altars<\/h3>\n<p>The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Intended as a memorial or a place for sacrifice, an altar was the most common image of worship in the Old Testament and in the wider ancient world. The typical altar was on a raised platform accessed by a ramp or stairway; this elevated the sacrificial worship toward heaven. The four horns on the corners of many altars (see Exod 27:2) marked off the sacred space of meeting between divine and human realms. Through sacrifice and burning, the offering was transferred from the visible to the invisible world.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus unites the various aspects of the altar imagery in himself as high priest, sacrificial lamb, and altar (see Heb 4:14-15; 7:24, 27; 9:14, 26; 10:10; 13:10, 12). Jesus anticipated his own sacrifice in his reference to the blood of martyrs (see Matt 23:35; Luke 11:50-51), and the cross serves as the final altar. Thus, the enthroned Lamb in Revelation removes the need for temple and altar (Rev 21:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20-21; 12:7-8; 22:9-14; 33:20; Exod 20:24-26; Josh 22:10-34; 1 Kgs 18:20-40; Hos 8:11-13; Matt 5:23-24; Heb 13:10-14; Rev 6:9; 8:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Altars<\/h3>\n<p>The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Intended as a memorial or a place for sacrifice, an altar was the most common image of worship in the Old Testament and in the wider ancient world. The typical altar was on a raised platform accessed by a ramp or stairway; this elevated the sacrificial worship toward heaven. The four horns on the corners of many altars (see Exod 27:2) marked off the sacred space of meeting between divine and human realms. Through sacrifice and burning, the offering was transferred from the visible to the invisible world.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus unites the various aspects of the altar imagery in himself as high priest, sacrificial lamb, and altar (see Heb 4:14-15; 7:24, 27; 9:14, 26; 10:10; 13:10, 12). Jesus anticipated his own sacrifice in his reference to the blood of martyrs (see Matt 23:35; Luke 11:50-51), and the cross serves as the final altar. Thus, the enthroned Lamb in Revelation removes the need for temple and altar (Rev 21:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20-21; 12:7-8; 22:9-14; 33:20; Exod 20:24-26; Josh 22:10-34; 1 Kgs 18:20-40; Hos 8:11-13; Matt 5:23-24; Heb 13:10-14; Rev 6:9; 8:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Altars The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Int...","summary_en":"Altars The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Int...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":142848,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Altars","title_en":"Altars","content_ro":"<h3>Altars<\/h3>\n<p>The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Intended as a memorial or a place for sacrifice, an altar was the most common image of worship in the Old Testament and in the wider ancient world. The typical altar was on a raised platform accessed by a ramp or stairway; this elevated the sacrificial worship toward heaven. The four horns on the corners of many altars (see Exod 27:2) marked off the sacred space of meeting between divine and human realms. Through sacrifice and burning, the offering was transferred from the visible to the invisible world.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus unites the various aspects of the altar imagery in himself as high priest, sacrificial lamb, and altar (see Heb 4:14-15; 7:24, 27; 9:14, 26; 10:10; 13:10, 12). Jesus anticipated his own sacrifice in his reference to the blood of martyrs (see Matt 23:35; Luke 11:50-51), and the cross serves as the final altar. Thus, the enthroned Lamb in Revelation removes the need for temple and altar (Rev 21:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20-21; 12:7-8; 22:9-14; 33:20; Exod 20:24-26; Josh 22:10-34; 1 Kgs 18:20-40; Hos 8:11-13; Matt 5:23-24; Heb 13:10-14; Rev 6:9; 8:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Altars<\/h3>\n<p>The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Intended as a memorial or a place for sacrifice, an altar was the most common image of worship in the Old Testament and in the wider ancient world. The typical altar was on a raised platform accessed by a ramp or stairway; this elevated the sacrificial worship toward heaven. The four horns on the corners of many altars (see Exod 27:2) marked off the sacred space of meeting between divine and human realms. Through sacrifice and burning, the offering was transferred from the visible to the invisible world.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus unites the various aspects of the altar imagery in himself as high priest, sacrificial lamb, and altar (see Heb 4:14-15; 7:24, 27; 9:14, 26; 10:10; 13:10, 12). Jesus anticipated his own sacrifice in his reference to the blood of martyrs (see Matt 23:35; Luke 11:50-51), and the cross serves as the final altar. Thus, the enthroned Lamb in Revelation removes the need for temple and altar (Rev 21:22).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 8:20-21; 12:7-8; 22:9-14; 33:20; Exod 20:24-26; Josh 22:10-34; 1 Kgs 18:20-40; Hos 8:11-13; Matt 5:23-24; Heb 13:10-14; Rev 6:9; 8:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Altars The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Int...","summary_en":"Altars The first recorded altar in Scripture was built by Noah (Gen 8:20-21), though Cain and Abel gave God an offering (4:3-5). The patriarchs built numerous altars (see 12:7-8; 13:4, 18; 22:9; 26:25; 33:20; 35:1, 14-15). These altars designated sacred sites of divine revelation and personal land claims in the Promised Land, both north (in Shechem) and south (in Beersheba). Altars were made of stone, earth, brick, or metal and wood. Their table-like form allowed smoke to rise unhindered. Int...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"25":[{"id":20763,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Joshua","title_en":"Book of Joshua","content_ro":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOSHUA, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>According to the Talmud, Joshua wrote the book. This ancient tradition is possibly based on the brief statement that Joshua “recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God” (24:26, <span>nlt<\/span>). However, this applies only to the renewal of the covenant (ch 24). The issue of authorship is tied up with the dating of the book. Since the book has no unambiguous markers on date and authorship, neither critics nor conservative scholars have been able to come to any agreement on these issues. According to a conservative analysis of Joshua, the book was written between 1375 <span>BC<\/span> and 1045 <span>BC<\/span> (premonarchic). The argument is based on the references to the migration of Dan (19:47; cf. Jgs 18:27-31), to Jerusalem as a Jebusite city (Jos 15:8, 63; 18:16, 28), to Sidon rather than Tyre as the prominent Phoenician city (11:8; 13:4-6; 19:28), and also on the eyewitness style (5:1, 6—in the MT). But critical scholars have raised issues that they considered could best be resolved by positing a seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> or even an exilic date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofInterpretation\">Problems of Interpretation<\/p>\n<h5>Holy War<\/h5>\n<p>The morality of the Conquest may be explained by the concept of holy war. The holy war motif would explain why Israel was to destroy the indigenous population (Dt 7:16; 20:16-18; Jos 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:10, 28-30, 35-42; 11:11). The justification may lie in the concept that Israel was God’s instrument of judgment on the Canaanite nations. This argument is related to the mention of the wickedness of the Canaanites (Gn 15:16; Dt 7:2-5, 25-26; 12:30-31; Jos 23:7; Jgs 2:11). However, the canonical narrative of the progression of the Conquest puts the responsibility on the Canaanites. They marched and fought against Israel (Nm 21:21-35; Jos 7:4-5; 8:5, 16-17; 9:1-2; 10:1-6; 11:1-5; 24:11). Therefore, it could be argued that in the process of war a sincere invitation to make peace was given to the kings (cf. Nm 21:21-22; Dt 20:10-11) but was refused. Instead, the kings took the initiative in battle. The responsibility for the destruction of the native population thus lay with the leadership. Yet all this was evidence of God’s working in human affairs, which the Bible simply states, “For it was the <span>Lord<\/span> himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the <span>Lord<\/span> had commanded Moses” (Jos 11:20, <span>niv<\/span>). Even as Pharaoh, whose heart the Lord hardened, was responsible for the plagues in Egypt, so the Canaanite rulers were responsible for the extermination of their populations. The biblical account of the Conquest affirms the mystery of human responsibility and divine sovereignty without explaining it.<\/p>\n<h5>Nature of the Conquest<\/h5>\n<p>Various explanations of the nature of the Conquest have been given. The traditional view of a blitzkrieg type of conquest, which resulted in a complete occupation of the whole land (cf. Jos 10:40; 11:1-3, 16-19), does not fit within the whole picture of the book. The book presents a realistic description of the areas that still had to be conquered (13:1-7) and of the military strength of the indigenous population (cf. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-18; 19:47). Moreover, Joshua promised that the Lord would continue to help Israel to occupy the land, as its population and needs developed (23:5). The occupation of Canaan was in two stages: conquest and gradual occupation (cf. Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The role of the final (canonical) form of the book is to present Joshua’s obedience to the law of Moses. Victory and defeat are illustrations of obedience and disobedience. Of course, there is tension in this because the descriptions of the Conquest are complete and yet incomplete. The tension is a dynamic device to show that the Conquest and enjoyment of the land depend wholly on obedience. The period of Joshua is viewed as a paradigm of obedient Israel. Thus, a holistic reading of the book presents an appeal to covenant loyalty directed to future generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Conquest of the Land, 1:1–12:24<\/h5>\n<h6>The Lord’s Commission of Joshua, 1:1-9<\/h6>\n<p>With the death of Moses (Jos 1:1), the Lord himself confirms Moses’ ordination of Joshua (Dt 34:9). He charges him with leadership in the conquest of Canaan (Jos 1:2-3), defines the geographical boundaries of the land (v 4), encourages him with his continued presence (vv 5, 9), and expects him to devoutly follow in “the law of Moses” (i.e., the law given in Dt; cf. Dt 31:9, 24-26; Jos 23:6), so that he may succeed in his mission (1:7-8). The original mission, as well as the ministry of Moses, find their continuity in Joshua.<\/p>\n<h6>Crossing the Jordan, 1:10–5:12<\/h6>\n<p>The first stage calls for the preparation of Israel. As their leader, Joshua must demonstrate to the people that he follows in the footsteps of Moses. He does this by reminding the Transjordan tribes to demonstrate loyalty to the command of Moses by joining with the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan (1:13-15; cf. Nm 32:20-27). They submitted to Joshua’s authority as to Moses’ (Jos 1:16-18). He demonstrates his military leadership in sending the two spies to Jericho (ch 2). His authority is accepted by priests (3:6; 4:10) and people (3:5-9) as they cross the Jordan. The crossing of the Jordan marks the public recognition of Joshua as a leader like Moses (4:14).<\/p>\n<p>The account of the crossing marks an important transition from the era of the exodus\/wilderness to the era of the Conquest. On the one hand, the story of Rahab illustrates how the Canaanites had heard about the Lord’s mighty acts (2:10-11) and reacted with great fear (cf. Ex 15:15; 23:27-28; Dt 2:25; 7:23; 11:25; 32:30). Rahab’s expression of faith in Israel’s God (2:11) anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant community as promised to the patriarchs (Gn 12:3). By faith Rahab was included in the covenant and was richly rewarded by the inclusion of her name in the lineage of Jesus (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites crossed the Jordan with the knowledge that the fear of God had come on the Canaanites (Jos 2:24). However, they were also instructed to show their reverence for the Lord by keeping a safe distance between themselves and the ark of the covenant (3:4) and by consecrating themselves (v 5). The “living God” was among them and required holiness and reverence from his people (v 10). He, in turn, would demonstrate his loyalty in the marvelous passage through the Jordan River (v 13) and in the conquest of the land (3:10). After the tribes had crossed the river (4:1), each leader of the 12 tribes took up a stone out of the dried-up riverbed and set up a memorial at Gilgal (vv 1-9, 20). Thus, Israel was to remember that the stones, taken from the place where the priests who carried the ark had stood, were reminders of the majestic presence of God. Future generations who were to hear this report (vv 21-24) were hereby encouraged because the fear of God would fall on all the peoples of the land (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The consecration before the conquest of Jericho is also symbolized by the act of circumcision (5:1-9) and by the celebration of the Passover (vv 10-12). The events are not necessarily chronologically related but were selected as examples of Israel’s responsiveness to Joshua’s ministry. Moses’ appeal to the new generation had its effect (cf. Dt 4:4-14; 6:1-5). The new generation served the Lord as long as Joshua and the elders were alive (Jos 24:31). Physical circumcision, neglected during the wilderness journey (5:5) due to unbelief, was a sign of spiritual responsiveness. The responsive nation received the external sign of the covenant with the anticipation that the Lord of the covenant would bless his people in giving them victory and the fruit of the land. Their reproach was rolled away (v 9). The covenant continuity is also brought out in the brief mention of the Passover celebration. The newness is their eating the fruit of the land. With the taste of the food of Canaan, the manna stopped. The desert experience was over. A new era was ushered in with their presence in the Promised Land (vv 11-12).<\/p>\n<h6>Conquest of Jericho, 5:13–6:27<\/h6>\n<p>The victory is the Lord’s. This is the message with which the battle of Jericho begins. The holy God who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:2–4:17) appeared to Joshua as the commander of the Lord’s army (Jos 5:14-15) with a message from the Lord (6:2). The city of Jericho will fall without a siege and ensuing battle. Israel’s response to Jericho’s preparedness for war (cf. 24:11) was strange, but the presence of the ark and the blowing of the trumpets symbolized that the Lord would fight for Israel, even as he had promised. However, Israel could not take any of the spoil. Because Yahweh fought for Israel, everything was to be devoted to him (6:17). The Lord honored the vow to Rahab, made by the spies, so that she and her family were kept alive (vv 17, 25), but they were temporarily placed outside the camp (v 23). The valuable metals were placed into the treasury (vv 19, 24), whereas everything else was burned by fire (v 24). Nothing was to be taken for personal gain; otherwise God’s judgment would rest on Israel (v 18). In order to emphasize God’s absolute ownership of Jericho, Joshua put a curse on anyone who would attempt to rebuild the city (6:26; cf. 1 Kgs 16:34). The rumors of Jericho’s destruction spread, and the peoples of Canaan knew that the Lord was with Joshua (Jos 6:27; cf. 1:5, 9).<\/p>\n<h6>Tragedy and Triumph at Ai, 7:1–8:29<\/h6>\n<p>Victory was short-lived because Achan defied God’s “ban,” took some of the objects, hid them in the ground under his tent (7:21), and brought God’s wrath on all of Israel (v 1). Israel was stunned by their defeat at Ai (vv 2-5). Joshua and the elders responded to the disaster by fasting and lamenting (vv 6-9). What a contrast between the reports of victory spread through the land and the anguished cry of God’s servant, fearful that the Canaanites would amass strength and wipe out Israel (v 9). Only after the people had consecrated themselves (v 13) and Achan was exposed and his memory removed (vv 25b-26) could they renew the attack on Ai with the encouraging promise of God’s presence and victory (8:1-2). Ai, too, was taken (vv 3-19) and the population execrated (vv 20-26), but Israel enjoyed the spoils by direct permission from the Lord (v 27). The ruins of Ai, the pile of stones covering the body of Ai’s king (vv 28-29), and the heap of rocks over Achan’s body were sobering reminders to Israel that God’s faithfulness requires absolute loyalty from his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Renewal of the Covenant, 8:30-35<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in a ceremonial covenant renewal at Shechem, as Moses had instructed (Jos 8:31; cf. Dt 11:29; 27). Joshua took care in the proper preparation of the altar (cf. Ex 20:25) on which dedicatory and communal offerings were presented. He copied the law as a symbol of his royal leadership and his devotion to the Lord (Jos 8:32; cf. Dt 17:18). All Israel (officers and people, aliens and native-born Israelites) together presented themselves for the reading of the blessings and the curses (Jos 8:33-35). The whole book of Deuteronomy (i.e., “the Book of the Law,” cf. Dt 31:26) was read in their presence. Half the tribes stood on Mt Gerizim and said “Amen” to the blessings, and the other six stood on Mt Ebal, saying “Amen” to the curses (cf. Dt 27:9-26).<\/p>\n<h6>Covenant with the Gibeonites, 9:1-27<\/h6>\n<p>The rumors of God’s mighty acts had brought fear on the Canaanite kings (cf. Jos 2:8-11, 24; 5:1; 6:27). The first defeat at Ai had given them a ray of hope that Israel could be put down. Rather than submit themselves to Israel and suffer from humiliation as servants of Israel, they joined forces against Joshua and Israel (9:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The Hivites from Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim (9:7, 17) did not join with their fellow Canaanites. Instead, they developed an intricate plan to deceive Israel and to sue for full treaty status. The purpose of the treaty was that of friendship (namely, “peace”), promising each other to be of mutual assistance in case of attack. The concern was with the preservation of life (vv 15, 24). Their deception included a ruse about the great distance they had traveled (vv 11-14) and a false report of Israel’s victories in Transjordan with no mention of their crossing the Jordan (9:9-10; cf. 5:1). The law permitted the submissive city to subject its population to a type of suzerainty treaty, in which Israel defined the terms and expected the subjugated populace to serve as its forced laborers (Dt 20:11; cf. Jgs 1:28-35; 1 Kgs 9:15-21). However, the treaty permitted the Hivites to maintain their way of life with the advantage of Israel’s military protection.<\/p>\n<h6>The Southern Campaign, 10:1-43<\/h6>\n<p>The king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek, led the cities of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon in an alliance against Gibeon as a military ploy to take a stand against Israel (Jos 10:1-5). The Gibeonites appealed to Israel for help based on their covenantal relationship (v 6). Joshua led Israel on a 25-mile (40-kilometer) hike through the wilderness from Gilgal up to Gibeon during one night (vv 7-9). The Israelite attack surprised the Canaanites, who were already frightened of the Israelites. The camp of the Canaanites was thrown into confusion, and the soldiers fled the hill country via the road of Beth-horon to Azekah and Makkedah (v 10). But while running, they were tormented with large hailstones (v 11). The victory was the Lord’s. Miraculously, Israel could push the Canaanites farther from the hill country because of the long day (vv 12-14). The marvel of this day was long remembered in the Book of Jashar (cf. 2 Sm 1:18), because on it the Lord listened to a man, namely Joshua (Jos 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>The five kings hidden in a cave at Makkedah were discovered, killed, hanged on trees, and buried in the cave (10:16-27). Their foolish attempt to make war on Israel came to a quick end. Since the coalition of large cities had been put down, Joshua led Israel in a rapid campaign of the other southern cities (vv 29-43). The region was taken in one campaign with the Lord’s help (v 42).<\/p>\n<h6>The Northern Campaign, 11:1-15<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites were again forced into battle, this time by the leadership of Jabin, king of Hazor. Jabin rallied the kings of the northern cities who assembled their troops and horses by the waters of Merom for battle against Israel (11:1-5). The similarity to the southern campaign is a literary way to demonstrate that the kings of the south and north initiated the war and were consequently defeated. So it was with the northern kings, who were routed as far as the region of Sidon in Phoenicia (v 8). Their horses were hamstrung and their chariots burned (v 9), as the Lord had instructed (v 6). Israel was to depend on the Lord (cf. Ps 20:7). Hazor, the great and ancient city, the center of Canaanite power in the north, was completely destroyed (Jos 11:10-13). The burning of Jericho, Ai, and Hazor were exceptions, because Israel had been promised Canaanite houses, wells, and cities (Dt 6:10-11; cf. Jos 24:13). The campaign narrative stresses again the absolute loyalty of Joshua to the Lord and to Moses, the servant of the Lord (Jos 11:9-15).<\/p>\n<h6>Summary of the Campaigns, 11:16–12:24<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua led Israel in victory and rest because of his careful adherence to the Lord’s directions to Moses. Moses had described the land to be conquered in detail (Dt 1:7), and Joshua took the regions of which Moses had spoken. Though the cities could have sued for a peaceable arrangement under which they would have been forced laborers (Dt 20:11), none of the cities recognized Israel. In fear they plotted and schemed how to destroy Israel. They were the aggressors. God had hardened their hearts (Jos 11:20). The theological reason is a mystery, as it was in the case of Pharaoh. But the net result was that Canaan was conquered and the population exterminated, except for the Hivites at Gibeon and their surrounding cities (vv 19-20). Even the Anakites, who had brought fear on Israel some 40 years before (Nm 13:33; cf. Dt 2:10, 21), were execrated (Jos 11:21). Yet it is already apparent that not every square mile of land was taken (v 22), even though in a sense the entire land was Israel’s, because major centers of Canaanite resistance had been broken. The tension between fulfillment and complete fulfillment is apparent in these verses.<\/p>\n<p>The listing of defeated kings (ch 12) includes the victories over Sihon and Og under Moses’ leadership. Their juxtaposition with the list of kings conquered under Joshua demonstrates the continuity of leadership and purpose—two leaders, many campaigns, but one battle. The Land of Promise is now a fulfillment. Through the campaigns the borders of the land of inheritance were now more apparent. In Transjordan the limits are from the Arnon to Mt Hermon (vv 2-5). In Canaan the boundary extends from the region south of Sidon to the Negev (vv 7-8).<\/p>\n<h5>The Division of the Land, 13:1–22:34<\/h5>\n<h6>The Command to Divide the Land, 13:1-7<\/h6>\n<p>Because of Joshua’s advanced age, the “whole” land was not taken. Moses had forewarned Israel that the inheritance would result from conquest as well as from gradual extension of Israel’s narrow boundaries. Slowly Israel was to inherit the whole land, lest it be overwhelmed by the size and be unable to use it properly (Ex 23:29-30; Dt 7:22). The areas still to be occupied were: the region to the north of Galilee, Mt Hermon (east of the Sea of Galilee), the area occupied by the Philistines, and regional Canaanite enclaves (Jos 13:2-7; cf. Jgs 1). Israel was not to be concerned with the future rights of occupation, because the Lord promised to help them (Jos 13:6).<\/p>\n<h6>Division of Transjordan, 13:8-33<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua did not alter the Mosaic arrangement concerning the allotments to the tribes of Manasseh, Reuben, and Gad (Jos 13:8, 32-33; cf. Nm 32; Dt 3:12-17). Their territory also excluded certain regions still occupied by Canaanites (Jos 13:13). The clans of Reuben had received the territory from the Arnon River north to Heshbon (vv 15-23). The clans of Gad had received the territory of Gilead, south of the Jabbok River to Heshbon (vv 24-28). Several clans of Manasseh received the region south of the Wadi Yarmuk to the Jabbok (vv 29-31). The Levitical towns are not listed here, but a reference is made to them as not receiving a patrimony, because they were to live off the offerings and sacrifices made to the Lord (Jos 13:14; cf. Nm 18:20-24; 35:1-8).<\/p>\n<h6>The Tribal Divisions in Canaan, 14:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>Eleazar, the high priest, and Joshua together cast lots to determine the boundaries, size, and allocation for the remaining nine and a half tribes. Again the exclusion of the tribe of Levi is mentioned (Jos 14:4), because their cities will be dealt with in chapters 20–21. Another literary device is special mention of the inheritance of Caleb in the beginning (14:6-15) and of Joshua at the conclusion (19:49-50). These two were the only ones who had left Egypt as adults, had been faithful spies, and had entered into the Promised Land (Nm 14:24, 30; Dt 1:36-38).<\/p>\n<h6>Judah, 15:1-63 (cf. Jgs 1:10-15, 20)<\/h6>\n<p>The boundaries of Judah extended from the Dead Sea westward to the Mediterranean (Jos 15:2-12). The cities of Judah are listed in its four regions: 29 in the Negev (vv 21-32), 42 cities in the Shephelah (or western foothills) and coastal plains (vv 33-47), 38 cities in the hill country (15:48-60), and 6 cities in the desert (vv 61-62). Judah was unable to take Jerusalem (v 63) until David made it his capital (cf. Jgs 1:21; 2 Sm 5:6-16).<\/p>\n<h6>Ephraim and Manasseh, 16:1–17:18<\/h6>\n<p>These two tribes, descended from Joseph, were richly blessed (cf. Gn 48; 49:22-26; Dt 33:13-17) and had obtained prominence among the tribes. They received one allotment as “the allotment for Joseph” (Jos 16:1). Part of Manasseh had already received a patrimony east of the Jordan (13:29-31). The limits for Ephraim and the west half of Manasseh were from Bethel to Mt Gilboa in the north and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean (16:1-3). Ephraim received the smaller portion in the south (vv 5-9) but was unable to drive the Canaanites out of Gezer. The clans of Manasseh are given, including Zelophehad (17:3-6; cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12), in order to clearly distinguish them from the clans of Manasseh in Transjordan. The region of west Manasseh extended from Shechem to Mt Gilboa (Jos 17:7-11); but Manasseh, also, was incapable of driving out the Canaanites completely (vv 12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Though they had received the largest portion of the land (more than a third), the tribes of Joseph complained. They knew that the Lord had blessed them (17:14), and they expected to get more cultivable land. But Joshua urged them to use the available land by cutting down the forests (vv 15-18). When they expressed realistic concern about Canaanite military power, Joshua called on them to do their share in occupying the land.<\/p>\n<h6>Seven Tribes, 18:1–19:51<\/h6>\n<p>The Israelites assembled at Shiloh to set up the tabernacle (cf. 1 Sm 1). At that point seven tribes had not yet received their patrimony. Joshua called for each tribe to commission three men to survey the land. When they returned, Joshua cast lots at the tabernacle in Shiloh and divided the land (Jos 18:3-10). The territory of Benjamin was between Judah and Ephraim (vv 11-28). Simeon’s allotment was in southern Judah (19:1-9), resulting in its absorption into Judah (cf. Gn 49:7). Zebulun (Jos 19:10-16), Issachar (vv 17-23), Asher (vv 24-31), and Naphtali (vv 32-39) received a portion north of Manasseh in the region of Galilee. Dan received the seventh lot and suffered subsequently, when it could not maintain the allotted territory because of the pressure of Judah on the east and the Philistines to the west (vv 40-48). They migrated northward and found the sources of the Jordan to be a fruitful region (Jos 19:47; cf. Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<h6>Conclusion, 19:49-51<\/h6>\n<p>The conclusion is symmetric with the beginning (Jos 14:1-14) in that Joshua also received a gift. Again, mention is made that all divisions were in the presence of the Lord, witnessed to and executed by the high priest Eleazar and Joshua (19:51; cf. 14:1).<\/p>\n<h6>Cities of Refuge and the Levitical Cities, 20:1–21:45<\/h6>\n<p>According to the instructions of Moses, six Levitical cities were set apart, three on each side of the Jordan, as cities of refuge (Nm 35:9-34; Dt 4:41-43; 19:1-10). The purpose was to provide “refuge” (asylum) for those who were guilty of manslaughter but had not intentionally killed someone. This practice was not to provide a way out for someone who was guilty, but to allow for the legal process to be completed (Jos 20).<\/p>\n<p>The Levites received by clan a total of 48 cities, six of which also served as cities of refuge (21:1-42). The Levites could not cultivate the soil because they were dependent on the tithes of the people (Nm 18:21-24), but they were permitted to have land for grazing. The dimensions of the land are given in Numbers 35:4-5. A special allocation is made to the descendants of Aaron (Jos 21:9-19), because they served as priests and their 13 cities were in the Judah-Simeon region, in proximity to the Jerusalem temple of the Solomonic era.<\/p>\n<p>With the allocation of the Levitical cities, the division of the land is concluded. The promise of the land is fulfilled (21:43-45). God is faithful! This section emphasizes the fulfillment, the power, and the grace of God, by which Israel entered into its rest. However, the book of Joshua also hints of the struggle that is still ahead of the Israelites and of the test that ultimately they will fail (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 3:7-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Return of the Transjordan Tribes, 22:1-34<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua dismissed the two and a half tribes with a commendation for their loyalty to the other tribes and to the Lord (Jos 22:1-4), with a warning not to succumb to idolatry but to love the Lord in accordance with the Deuteronomic law, and with a blessing (vv 5-8). However, as they returned they set up a large altar by the Jordan on the western side. The other tribes heard about it and met at Shiloh (v 12). They wisely commissioned Phinehas, the son of the high priest, with ten representatives of the tribes, to investigate the matter. The commission charged the Transjordan tribes with treachery (Jos 22:15-20; cf. Nm 25; Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>The response of the Transjordan tribes demonstrated their concern for the unity of the tribes and for the worship of God. These tribes feared being excluded from the fellowship of God’s people and had purposefully constructed an altar, identical to that prescribed in the law, in order to demonstrate their common heritage (Jos 22:21-30). The altar was not for sacrifice or worship but functioned as a symbol of the covenantal unity of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p>Phinehas and the tribal representatives were pleased with the response and left with the assurance of God’s presence (22:30-31). Their report to the tribes led to reconciliation of all the tribes on this matter. The narrative concludes with a mention of the name given to the altar: “A witness between us and them that the <span>Lord<\/span> is our God, too” (v 34, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Epilogue: The Land Is a Sacred Trust, 23:1–24:33<\/h5>\n<p>The last two chapters contain Joshua’s farewell speeches to all the leaders and to all Israel.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to the Leaders, 23:1-16<\/h6>\n<p>Joshua reviews what the Lord has done for Israel in giving the land to the tribes. He has demonstrated his loyalty. And he will continue to be with his people so that no enemy can stand against them. He will fulfill every outstanding promise, even as he had already fulfilled promises. However, they must persevere in their loyalty to the Lord. Loyalty to the Lord is not apart from loyalty to the law of Moses. Apostasy will be severely punished, first by leaving the nations to ensnare Israel, and then by consuming them in his wrath.<\/p>\n<h6>Address to Israel, 24:1-28<\/h6>\n<p>The address ends with a covenant renewal at Shechem (Jos 24:1, 25-28; cf. 8:30-35). In the ancient Near East it was common when making a treaty (covenant) to give a brief historical summary of the relationship of the parties involved. Joshua reviewed Israel’s history from the patriarchs to their generation: patriarchs (24:2-4), exodus (vv 5-7), and conquest (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>The goodness, presence, and loyalty of Yahweh was evident to them. Yahweh also expected “faithfulness” from his people in the form of whole allegiance, without any form of idolatry (Jos 24:14-15). As the head of his family, Joshua vowed to be loyal (v 15). The people responded by giving reasons for being loyal to the Lord (vv 16-18). But Joshua pushed them to a deeper commitment by challenging their profession (vv 19-20), then recording their vow and setting up a stone of witness against them (vv 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>End of an Era, 24:29-33<\/h6>\n<p>The book began with a reference to the death of Moses (1:1-2) and concludes with the death and burial of Joshua (24:29-30) and of Eleazar the high priest (v 33). This marks the end of an era. The burial of Joseph’s bones (Jos 24:32; cf. Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19) in a plot purchased by Jacob (Gn 33:19) brings together the hope characteristic of the epoch of Moses and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cities of Refuge; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Israel, History of; Joshua (Person) #1; Levitical Cities.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","summary_en":"JOSHUA, Book of First of the historical books in the English Bible and the first of the Former Prophets (including Judges, the books of Samuel, and the books of Kings) in the Hebrew Bible. It begins with the Lord’s commission of Joshua (Jos 1:1-9) and concludes with the burial of Joshua, Eleazar, and the bones of Joseph (24:29-33). The purpose of the book is to show how Joshua continued in the footsteps of Moses, how the Lord gave the land to Israel, and how Israel might prosper in the land. ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Exod 20
— 26 versete
Exod 20
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse