📖 Biblia online

Citește Biblia

Biblia audio Planuri audio structurate — ascultă Biblia zilnică

Ezechiel 45

¹ ,,Când veţi împărţi ţara ca moştenire prin sorţ, să ridicaţi ca dar sfânt pentru Domnul o bucată din ţară, lungă de douăzeci şi cinci de mii de coţi şi lată de zece mii: aceasta va fi sfântă în toată întinderea ei.

² Din bucata aceasta veţi lua pentru sfântul Locaş cinci sute de coţi în lung şi cinci sute de coţi în lat, în patru laturi; şi cinci zeci de coţi ca loc slobod de jur împrejur.

³ Din această întindere să măsori o bucată lungă de douăzeci şi cinci de mii şi lată de zece mii, pentru sfântul Locaş, pentru Locul prea sfânt.

⁴ Aceasta este partea sfântă din ţară: ea va fi a preoţilor cari fac slujba în sfântul Locaş, cari se apropie de Domnul să -I slujească; acolo vor fi casele lor, şi acesta va fi un loc sfânt pentru Locaşul cel sfânt.

⁵ Leviţilor, cari slujesc în casă, să li se dea în stăpânire un ţinut de douăzeci şi cinci de mii de coţi în lung şi zece mii în lat, pentru cetăţile în cari vor locui împreună cu douăzeci de odăi.

⁶ Să daţi şi cetăţii o moşie de cinci mii de coţi în lat şi douăzeci şi cinci de mii în lung, lângă partea cea sfântă luată pentru sfântul Locaş; aceasta va fi pentru toată casa lui Israel.

⁷ Pentru domnitor veţi osebi un loc lângă cele două laturi ale părţii sfinte şi ale moşiei cetăţii, dealungul părţii sfinte şi dealungul moşiei cetăţii, la apus de partea de apus şi la răsărit de partea de răsărit, pe o lungime cât una din părţi, dela hotarul de apus până la hotarul de răsărit.

⁸ Acesta va fi pământul lui, moşia lui în Israel; şi domnitorii Mei nu vor mai asupri poporul Meu, ci vor împărţi casei lui Israel cealaltă parte a ţării, după seminţiile ei.

⁹ Aşa vorbeşte Domnul Dumnezeu: ,,Destul, domnitori ai lui Israel! Încetaţi cu sâlnicia şi răpirile, faceţi judecată şi dreptate! Înlăturaţi stoarcerile voastre dela poporul Meu, -zice Domnul Dumnezeu. -

¹⁰ Să aveţi cumpene drepte, o efă dreaptă, şi un bat drept.

¹¹ Efa şi batul să aibă aceeaş măsură; batul să cuprindă a zecea parte dintr-un omer, şi efa a zecea parte dintr-un omer; măsura lor se va potrivi după omer.

¹² Siclul să fie de douăzeci de ghere. Cinci sicli să fie cinci, zece sicli să fie zece, iar mina să fie de cincizeci de sicli!

¹³ Iată darul de mâncare pe care-l veţi ridica: a şasea parte dintr-o efă la un omer de grâu, şi a şasea parte din efă la un omer de orz.

¹⁴ Pentru untdelemn, la un bat de untdelemn, veţi datora a zecea parte dintr-un bat la un cor, care este tot una cu un omer de zece baţi, căci zece baţi fac un omer.

¹⁵ O oaie dintr-o turmă de două sute de oi din toate seminţiile lui Israel, să fie dată ca dar de mâncare, ardere de tot şi jertfă de mulţămire, pentru ca să slujească drept jertfă de ispăşire, -zice Domnul Dumnezeu. -

¹⁶ Tot poporul din ţară va trebui să dea darul acesta de mâncare pentru domnitorul lui Israel.

¹⁷ Domnitorul va fi dator să dea arderile de tot, darurile de mâncare şi jertfele de băutură la sărbători, la lunile noi, la Sabate, la toate adunările de sărbătoare ale casei lui Israel. El va îngriji de jertfa ispăşitoare, de darul de mâncare, de arderea de tot, şi de jerfa de mulţămire, ca să se facă ispăşire pentru casa lui Israel.``

¹⁸ Aşa vorbeşte Domnul Dumnezeu: ,,În cea dintâi zi a lunii întâi, vei lua un viţel fără cusur, şi vei face ispăşire pentru sfântul Locaş.

¹⁹ Preotul va lua din sângele jertfei ispăşitoare, şi va pune pe uşiorii casei, pe cele patru colţuri ale pervazului altarului, şi pe uşiorii porţii curţii dinlăuntru.

²⁰ Tot aşa vei face şi în ziua întâi a lunii a şaptea, în ziua întâi a lunii noi, pentru cei din popor cari păcătuiesc fără voie sau din nechibzuinţă; şi astfel veţi curăţi casa.

²¹ În ziua a patrusprezecea a lunii întâi, veţi prăznui Paştele. Sărbătoarea va ţinea şapte zile, în care timp se vor mânca azimi.

²² Domnitorul va aduce în ziua aceea, pentru el şi pentru tot poporul ţării, un viţel ca jertfă de ispăşire.

²³ În timpul celor şapte zile ale sărbătorii, va aduce ca ardere de tot Domnului, şapte viţei şi şapte berbeci fără cusur, în fiecare din cele şapte zile, şi un ţap ca jerfă de ispăşire în fiecare zi.

²⁴ Va adăuga şi darul de mâncare: câte o efă de fiecare viţel, şi o efă de fiecare berbece, cu câte un hin de untdelemn de efă.

²⁵ În ziua a cincisprezecea a lunii a şaptea, la sărbătoare, va aduce timp de şapte zile aceleaşi jertfe de ispăşire, aceleaşi arderi de tot şi acelaş dar de mâncare împreună cu untdelemnul.``

{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":3754,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Jesus*, Baptism","title_en":"of Jesus*, Baptism","content_ro":"<h3>BAPTISM OF JESUS*<\/h3>\nMajor event in Jesus’ life, which marked the beginning of his ministry. The fact that John the Baptist baptized Jesus is disputed by very few scholars today, but the purpose and significance of Jesus’ baptism remain controversial.<\/p>\nThe Gospel accounts agree that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance (Mt 3:6-10; Mk 1:4-5; Lk 3:3-14). He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven was at hand and that God’s people should prepare for the Lord’s coming by a renewal of faith toward God. For John, that meant repentance, confession of sins, and practicing righteousness. That being so, why was Jesus baptized? If Jesus was sinless, as the NT proclaims (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 4:15; 1 Pt 2:22), why did he submit to a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins? The Gospels provide the answers.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of Mark<\/p>\nMark presents the baptism of Jesus as a necessary preparation for his period of temptation and ministry. At his baptism Jesus received the Father’s approval and the bestowal of the Holy Spirit (1:9-11). Mark’s focus on Jesus’ special relation to the Father, “You are my beloved Son, and I am fully pleased with you” (1:11, nlt<\/span>), brings together two important OT references. Jesus’ messiahship is presented in a radically new way, in which the ruling Messiah (Ps 2:7) is also the Suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 42:1). Popular Jewish belief expected a ruling Messiah who would establish the kingdom of God, not a Messiah who would suffer for the people. Mark intended to show that in Jesus alone had God’s appointed time for the fulfillment of his purpose come.<\/p>\nThe statement that the heavens opened at the baptism of Jesus (Mk 1:10) may proclaim the arrival of the “end times” (the time of fulfillment and the establishment of God’s kingdom). A then-current Jewish interpretation of Isaiah 64:1 held that in the last days God would open the heavens and come down to his people. In Jewish thought the rending of the heavens was also associated with hearing God’s voice and the bestowal of God’s Spirit.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of Matthew<\/p>\nMatthew’s account of Jesus’ baptism has more detail than Mark’s. It begins by noting John’s reluctance to baptize Jesus (3:14). John was persuaded only after Jesus explained to him that the act was “fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness” (3:15, rsv<\/span>). Although the full meaning of those words is uncertain, they at least suggest that Jesus’ baptism was necessary to accomplish God’s will. In both the Old and New Testaments (Ps 98:2-3; Rom 1:17) God’s righteousness is seen in his salvation for his people. That is why the Messiah can be called “The Lord<\/span> Is Our Righteousness” (Jer 23:6; cf. Is 11:1-5). Jesus told John that his baptism was necessary to do God’s will in bringing about salvation for his people. Thus the Father’s declaration at Jesus’ baptism is presented in the form of a public announcement, emphasizing that Jesus was God’s anointed Servant about to begin his ministry as the bringer of the Lord’s salvation.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of Luke<\/p>\nLuke passes over Jesus’ baptism quickly, placing it alongside the baptism of others who came to John (3:21-22). The context in Luke also sheds some light on the purpose of Jesus’ baptism. Luke, unlike Matthew, places the genealogy of Jesus after his baptism and just before his ministry begins. The parallel to Moses, whose genealogy occurs just before his primary work begins (Ex 6:14-25), seems more than coincidental. It is probably intended to illustrate Jesus’ role in bringing deliverance (salvation) to God’s people just as Moses did in the OT. At his baptism, by the descent of the Holy Spirit upon him, Jesus was equipped to do the mission God had called him to do. Following his temptation (Lk 4:1-13), Jesus entered the synagogue and declared to the people that he had been anointed by the Spirit to proclaim good news (4:16-21). That anointing came at Jesus’ baptism (cf. Acts 10:37-38).<\/p>\nIn his Gospel account, Luke tried to identify Jesus with the common people—for example, in the birth story (with Jesus born in a stable and visited by lowly shepherds, Lk 2:8-20) and through placing the genealogy (stressing Jesus’ relation to all of humanity, 3:38) right after the baptism. Thus, Luke saw the baptism as Jesus’ first step in identifying himself with those he had come to save.<\/p>\nIn the OT the Messiah was always inseparable from the people he represented (see especially Jer 30:21 and Ez 45–46). Although the “servant” in Isaiah is sometimes viewed corporately (Is 44:1) and sometimes individually (53:3), he is always viewed as the representative of the people<\/em> to the Lord (49:5-26), as well as the servant of the Lord.<\/em><\/p>\nEvidently Luke, along with Mark and Matthew, was trying to show that Jesus, as the divine representative of the people, had identified himself with them in his baptism.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of John<\/p>\nThe fourth Gospel does not say that Jesus was baptized but does say that John the Baptist saw the Spirit descend upon Jesus (Jn 1:32-34). The account emphasizes that Jesus went to John during John’s preaching and baptizing ministry; John recognized that Jesus was the Christ, that God’s Spirit was upon him, and that he was the Son of God. John also recognized that Jesus, unlike himself, baptized with the Holy Spirit (1:29-36).<\/p>\nJohn the Baptist described Jesus as the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (1:29, nlt<\/span>). The closest OT parallel to that statement comes from a “servant of the Lord” passage (Is 53:6-7). It is possible that “Lamb of God” could be an alternate translation of the Aramaic term “servant of God.”<\/p>\nThe sense of Jesus as the one who bears the sins of the people is obviously in view in the fourth Gospel. That Jesus was the promised representative and deliverer of the people was understood by John the Baptist and conveyed by the Gospel writer.<\/p>\nConclusion<\/p>\nIn the four Gospels it is clear that the Holy Spirit came upon Jesus at his baptism to enable him to do the work of God. All four Gospel writers saw that Jesus had been anointed by God to accomplish his mission of bringing salvation to the people. Those ideas provide a key to understanding why Jesus was baptized. On that occasion at the beginning of his ministry, God anointed Jesus with the Holy Spirit to do his mediating work between God and the people. At his baptism Jesus was identified as the one who would bear the people’s sins; Jesus was baptized to identify himself with sinful people.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BAPTISM OF JESUS*<\/h3>\nMajor event in Jesus’ life, which marked the beginning of his ministry. The fact that John the Baptist baptized Jesus is disputed by very few scholars today, but the purpose and significance of Jesus’ baptism remain controversial.<\/p>\nThe Gospel accounts agree that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance (Mt 3:6-10; Mk 1:4-5; Lk 3:3-14). He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven was at hand and that God’s people should prepare for the Lord’s coming by a renewal of faith toward God. For John, that meant repentance, confession of sins, and practicing righteousness. That being so, why was Jesus baptized? If Jesus was sinless, as the NT proclaims (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 4:15; 1 Pt 2:22), why did he submit to a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins? The Gospels provide the answers.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of Mark<\/p>\nMark presents the baptism of Jesus as a necessary preparation for his period of temptation and ministry. At his baptism Jesus received the Father’s approval and the bestowal of the Holy Spirit (1:9-11). Mark’s focus on Jesus’ special relation to the Father, “You are my beloved Son, and I am fully pleased with you” (1:11, nlt<\/span>), brings together two important OT references. Jesus’ messiahship is presented in a radically new way, in which the ruling Messiah (Ps 2:7) is also the Suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 42:1). Popular Jewish belief expected a ruling Messiah who would establish the kingdom of God, not a Messiah who would suffer for the people. Mark intended to show that in Jesus alone had God’s appointed time for the fulfillment of his purpose come.<\/p>\nThe statement that the heavens opened at the baptism of Jesus (Mk 1:10) may proclaim the arrival of the “end times” (the time of fulfillment and the establishment of God’s kingdom). A then-current Jewish interpretation of Isaiah 64:1 held that in the last days God would open the heavens and come down to his people. In Jewish thought the rending of the heavens was also associated with hearing God’s voice and the bestowal of God’s Spirit.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of Matthew<\/p>\nMatthew’s account of Jesus’ baptism has more detail than Mark’s. It begins by noting John’s reluctance to baptize Jesus (3:14). John was persuaded only after Jesus explained to him that the act was “fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness” (3:15, rsv<\/span>). Although the full meaning of those words is uncertain, they at least suggest that Jesus’ baptism was necessary to accomplish God’s will. In both the Old and New Testaments (Ps 98:2-3; Rom 1:17) God’s righteousness is seen in his salvation for his people. That is why the Messiah can be called “The Lord<\/span> Is Our Righteousness” (Jer 23:6; cf. Is 11:1-5). Jesus told John that his baptism was necessary to do God’s will in bringing about salvation for his people. Thus the Father’s declaration at Jesus’ baptism is presented in the form of a public announcement, emphasizing that Jesus was God’s anointed Servant about to begin his ministry as the bringer of the Lord’s salvation.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of Luke<\/p>\nLuke passes over Jesus’ baptism quickly, placing it alongside the baptism of others who came to John (3:21-22). The context in Luke also sheds some light on the purpose of Jesus’ baptism. Luke, unlike Matthew, places the genealogy of Jesus after his baptism and just before his ministry begins. The parallel to Moses, whose genealogy occurs just before his primary work begins (Ex 6:14-25), seems more than coincidental. It is probably intended to illustrate Jesus’ role in bringing deliverance (salvation) to God’s people just as Moses did in the OT. At his baptism, by the descent of the Holy Spirit upon him, Jesus was equipped to do the mission God had called him to do. Following his temptation (Lk 4:1-13), Jesus entered the synagogue and declared to the people that he had been anointed by the Spirit to proclaim good news (4:16-21). That anointing came at Jesus’ baptism (cf. Acts 10:37-38).<\/p>\nIn his Gospel account, Luke tried to identify Jesus with the common people—for example, in the birth story (with Jesus born in a stable and visited by lowly shepherds, Lk 2:8-20) and through placing the genealogy (stressing Jesus’ relation to all of humanity, 3:38) right after the baptism. Thus, Luke saw the baptism as Jesus’ first step in identifying himself with those he had come to save.<\/p>\nIn the OT the Messiah was always inseparable from the people he represented (see especially Jer 30:21 and Ez 45–46). Although the “servant” in Isaiah is sometimes viewed corporately (Is 44:1) and sometimes individually (53:3), he is always viewed as the representative of the people<\/em> to the Lord (49:5-26), as well as the servant of the Lord.<\/em><\/p>\nEvidently Luke, along with Mark and Matthew, was trying to show that Jesus, as the divine representative of the people, had identified himself with them in his baptism.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of John<\/p>\nThe fourth Gospel does not say that Jesus was baptized but does say that John the Baptist saw the Spirit descend upon Jesus (Jn 1:32-34). The account emphasizes that Jesus went to John during John’s preaching and baptizing ministry; John recognized that Jesus was the Christ, that God’s Spirit was upon him, and that he was the Son of God. John also recognized that Jesus, unlike himself, baptized with the Holy Spirit (1:29-36).<\/p>\nJohn the Baptist described Jesus as the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (1:29, nlt<\/span>). The closest OT parallel to that statement comes from a “servant of the Lord” passage (Is 53:6-7). It is possible that “Lamb of God” could be an alternate translation of the Aramaic term “servant of God.”<\/p>\nThe sense of Jesus as the one who bears the sins of the people is obviously in view in the fourth Gospel. That Jesus was the promised representative and deliverer of the people was understood by John the Baptist and conveyed by the Gospel writer.<\/p>\nConclusion<\/p>\nIn the four Gospels it is clear that the Holy Spirit came upon Jesus at his baptism to enable him to do the work of God. All four Gospel writers saw that Jesus had been anointed by God to accomplish his mission of bringing salvation to the people. Those ideas provide a key to understanding why Jesus was baptized. On that occasion at the beginning of his ministry, God anointed Jesus with the Holy Spirit to do his mediating work between God and the people. At his baptism Jesus was identified as the one who would bear the people’s sins; Jesus was baptized to identify himself with sinful people.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BAPTISM OF JESUS* Major event in Jesus’ life, which marked the beginning of his ministry. The fact that John the Baptist baptized Jesus is disputed by very few scholars today, but the purpose and significance of Jesus’ baptism remain controversial. The Gospel accounts agree that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance (Mt 3:6-10; Mk 1:4-5; Lk 3:3-14). He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven was at hand and that God’s people should prepare for the Lord’s coming by a renewal of faith toward...","summary_en":"BAPTISM OF JESUS* Major event in Jesus’ life, which marked the beginning of his ministry. The fact that John the Baptist baptized Jesus is disputed by very few scholars today, but the purpose and significance of Jesus’ baptism remain controversial. The Gospel accounts agree that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance (Mt 3:6-10; Mk 1:4-5; Lk 3:3-14). He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven was at hand and that God’s people should prepare for the Lord’s coming by a renewal of faith toward...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17476,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Inheritance","title_en":"Inheritance","content_ro":"<h3>INHERITANCE<\/h3>\nLegacy or bequest. Inheritance plays an unusually significant role in the Scriptures when it is used to convey theological truths. As we might expect, these theological applications reflect legal customs in force during OT and NT times.<\/p>\nLegal and Historical Aspect<\/p>\n<h5>The Patriarchs<\/h5>\nWe learn something of early-second-millennium BC<\/span> practices from the patriarchal stories in Genesis. For example, the narrative indicates that the firstborn could normally expect to receive the birthright. Yet exceptions abound. Ishmael (Gn 16:15; 17:15-21), Esau (25:23), and Reuben (49:3-4) did not receive the birthright. Another item of special interest is Abraham’s suggestion that, in the absence of a son, his servant Eliezer might be regarded as the heir (15:2-5); scholars have found confirmation of this practice in Hurrian legal documents of the second millennium.<\/p>\n<h5>The Hebrew Nation<\/h5>\nAccording to Deuteronomy 21:15-17, Hebrew firstborns were legally entitled to a double portion of the inheritance. Israelite law also made provision for widows through the practice of levirate marriage (Dt 25:5; see Gn 38:8; Ru 4:5).<\/p>\nAccording to Numbers 27:1-11, the daughters of Zelophehad argued that they should receive the inheritance since their father had died without sons. Consequently, God decreed that if a man died without sons, the inheritance should be transferred to his daughter; if he had no daughter, to his brothers; if he had no brothers, to his nearest relatives. This particular incident also illustrates the importance of preserving tribal possessions: the daughters of Zelophehad were not allowed to marry outside the tribe of Manasseh, for this would mean transferral of the property to another tribe (Nm 36).<\/p>\nHow highly the Israelites valued their family’s inherited possessions may be gathered from Leviticus 25:25-28. If an individual sold his land for financial reasons, provision must be made for a relative to redeem it; if he had no near relative, he could still purchase it back at a later time, and even if he could not afford to do so, the land automatically reverted to him in the Year of Jubilee, when all debts were canceled (note also Lv 27:14-25).<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament<\/h5>\nApart from the reference to levirate marriage in Matthew 22:23-33 (Mk 12:18-27; Lk 20:27-40), the NT has little to say about principles of property transferral during Roman times.<\/p>\nIn the parable of the prodigal son, the younger son in the family requested his share of the inheritance (Lk 15:12). One should also note that the elder son, who with false piety looked down on his brother’s behavior, had not protested when his brother asked for the inheritance; on the contrary, the elder brother too, without complaining, received his share—presumably a double portion.<\/p>\nIn another significant passage (Gal 4:1-2) Paul, seeking to illustrate a theological point, refers to secular practices. An heir, he tells us, is subject to guardians and managers during his childhood, up to the time he actually inherits. The point Paul wants to establish is clear enough, but the illustration does not coincide with what we know of Roman law and unfortunately scholars have been unable to identify the precise social custom in view. It may be that Paul was making reference, in general rather than strict legal terms, to some practice with which he and the Galatians were familiar.<\/p>\nTheological Aspect<\/p>\n<h5>Canaan as Israel’s Inheritance<\/h5>\nThe conviction that God gave Palestine to the Israelites for their inheritance serves as a bridge between the historical and the theological data. The historical element lies in the obvious fact that the Promised Land, a physical entity, was certainly occupied by the Hebrews and distributed among their tribes. Theologically, however, the Scriptures speak of this occupation as a divine gift; in effect, even the method of distribution was based on the concept that the land belongs to God (Lv 25:23; see Ex 15:17; Jos 22:27; Ez 38:16; Jl 1:6).<\/p>\nThe theme goes back to Genesis 12:1-3. God, in choosing Abraham, instructed him to move to a new country and promised to make him a great and blessed nation (Heb 11:8). The significance of the land in this Abrahamic promise is made more explicit later, when we are told that God promised to give Canaan to Abraham’s descendants after four centuries of Egyptian bondage (Gn 15:12-21; see Acts 7:5).<\/p>\nSince Canaan was occupied by wicked inhabitants, the land was to be taken by force; to inherit the land therefore really means to take possession<\/em> of it. Israel must trust God, whose land it is, to give them the victory (Jos 1:1-9; 21:43-45; Jgs 7:2; Ps 44:1-3; Acts 13:19). Once they conquered the land, it was apportioned among the tribes according to their size (following the instructions in Nm 26:52-54). God further commanded the people to divide the land by lot (vv 55-56). Thus, from the initial promise to Abraham, to the actual apportionment of the land and even with reference to the future (Is 60:21; Ez 45:1-8; 47:13–48:29), the people were made fully aware that their inheritance lay in the hands of a sovereign Lord.<\/p>\n<h5>The Believer’s Inheritance<\/h5>\nIn the OT we find the concept of inheritance transferred from the purely physical to the spiritual. The tribe of Levi, which constituted the priestly clan, received no inheritance, because “the Lord is their inheritance” (Dt 18:1-2; see Nm 18:8-24). The Levites, in other words, received no land apportionment, but in their service to God they could begin to enjoy the fuller blessings to which the land inheritance pointed.<\/p>\nThat this truth could not be restricted to Levites is hinted at in Exodus 19:6, where the whole nation is called “a kingdom of priests” (see 1 Pt 2:9). Psalm 16 makes it clear that no one understood more clearly than David what those words entailed. Even if he were deprived of Israel’s physical inheritance, he had received by lot a more beautiful heritage, the Lord himself, in whose presence he found full joy and everlasting pleasures (Ps 16:5-6, 11; see also Pss 73:25-26; 142:5; Is 58:14; Lam 3:24).<\/p>\nIn later Judaism, during and after the intertestamental period, the figure was extended considerably. For example, the rabbis began to speak of the law as the inheritance of the faithful. Further, they might give the idea a negative turn, as when the wicked are said to inherit hell (cf. Jb 27:13). Neither of these figures is found in the NT.<\/p>\nWe also read in Jewish literature statements about inheriting the age to come, the kingdom, eternal life; these ideas occur frequently in the NT (Mt 19:29; 25:34; Lk 10:25; 18:18; 1 Cor 6:9-10; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; Ti 3:7; Jas 2:5). Such an inheritance, however, belongs only to those who are sanctified by God’s word (Acts 20:32; 26:18; Col 1:12; note also Jn 17:17; Col 3:23-24). These future blessings do not exclude the physical (Mt 5:5; note Ps 37:11, 29; Is 60:21; Rom 4:13; 2 Pt 3:13), but they certainly exclude human frailty, for God’s inheritance is imperishable (1 Cor 15:50). In short, our heritage is nothing less than full salvation (Heb 1:14; 11:7), which God carefully guards for us in heaven (1 Pt 1:4).<\/p>\nDoubtless, the most significant feature in the NT is its emphasis that, as a result of the work of Christ, his people begin even now<\/em> to receive the promised inheritance. The Gospel of John frequently stresses the present reality of eternal life, as does the Letter to the Hebrews (cf. 6:12-17 with 9:15 and 11:13, 39-40).<\/p>\nPaul treats this whole matter thoroughly in Galatians 3:7–4:7. In response to the Judaizers, who claim that the Abrahamic inheritance is restricted to those who become Jews through circumcision, Paul argues vigorously that Abraham’s true children are those who believe, whether Jew or Gentile (3:7; see Acts 26:16-18; Eph 3:6). They become heirs of God’s promise, for they receive the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The principle of inheritance is promise, not the Law (v 18). Those who believe are brought into union with Christ (vv 27-29); but then they are not merely Abraham’s children but God’s (v 26), for Christ is the Son of God and God has determined to send the Spirit of his Son to believers so that they too may call God Father<\/em> (Gal 4:4-7; see also Rom 8:15-16).<\/p>\nIndeed, Christ himself as the Son is the true heir (Mt 21:38; Mk 12:7; Lk 20:14); he has inherited a name above every name (Phil 2:9; Heb 1:4) and has been appointed heir of all things (Heb 1:2; see Ps 2:7-8; Mt 28:18). But by his grace, all who become his through faith are counted joint heirs with him (Rom 8:17).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Inheritance<\/h5>\nWith a bold shift in the metaphor, the Scriptures speak of believers as God’s inheritance. In the beautiful “Song of Moses” the author speaks of God as the Israelites’ Father (Dt 32:6), who has taken special interest in their inheritance (v 8). Then we are told why God cares: “For the Lord<\/span>’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance” (Dt 32:9, niv<\/span>). This theme becomes very prominent throughout the OT (e.g., Dt 9:26-29; 1 Kgs 8:51-53; Pss 28:9; 33:12; 74:2; Is 19:25; Jer 10:16; Zec 2:12). Elsewhere, Israel is spoken of as God’s special possession (e.g., Ex 19:5; Dt 7:6).<\/p>\nIn Ephesians 1:14 “the redemption of the possession” refers to the final salvation of believers, who are God’s treasure. Further, “we have obtained an inheritance” (Eph 1:11) may well be translated, “we have been made an inheritance,” that is, been “chosen as God’s portion,” a view supported by verse 18. No more fundamental idea than this can be found in Scripture, and its essence is expressed by the words of the One who sits on the throne: “He who conquers shall have this heritage, and I will be his God and he shall be my son” (Rv 21:7, rsv<\/span>; see Lv 26:11-12; 2 Sm 7:14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Adoption; Birthright; Firstborn; Heir.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INHERITANCE<\/h3>\nLegacy or bequest. Inheritance plays an unusually significant role in the Scriptures when it is used to convey theological truths. As we might expect, these theological applications reflect legal customs in force during OT and NT times.<\/p>\nLegal and Historical Aspect<\/p>\n<h5>The Patriarchs<\/h5>\nWe learn something of early-second-millennium BC<\/span> practices from the patriarchal stories in Genesis. For example, the narrative indicates that the firstborn could normally expect to receive the birthright. Yet exceptions abound. Ishmael (Gn 16:15; 17:15-21), Esau (25:23), and Reuben (49:3-4) did not receive the birthright. Another item of special interest is Abraham’s suggestion that, in the absence of a son, his servant Eliezer might be regarded as the heir (15:2-5); scholars have found confirmation of this practice in Hurrian legal documents of the second millennium.<\/p>\n<h5>The Hebrew Nation<\/h5>\nAccording to Deuteronomy 21:15-17, Hebrew firstborns were legally entitled to a double portion of the inheritance. Israelite law also made provision for widows through the practice of levirate marriage (Dt 25:5; see Gn 38:8; Ru 4:5).<\/p>\nAccording to Numbers 27:1-11, the daughters of Zelophehad argued that they should receive the inheritance since their father had died without sons. Consequently, God decreed that if a man died without sons, the inheritance should be transferred to his daughter; if he had no daughter, to his brothers; if he had no brothers, to his nearest relatives. This particular incident also illustrates the importance of preserving tribal possessions: the daughters of Zelophehad were not allowed to marry outside the tribe of Manasseh, for this would mean transferral of the property to another tribe (Nm 36).<\/p>\nHow highly the Israelites valued their family’s inherited possessions may be gathered from Leviticus 25:25-28. If an individual sold his land for financial reasons, provision must be made for a relative to redeem it; if he had no near relative, he could still purchase it back at a later time, and even if he could not afford to do so, the land automatically reverted to him in the Year of Jubilee, when all debts were canceled (note also Lv 27:14-25).<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament<\/h5>\nApart from the reference to levirate marriage in Matthew 22:23-33 (Mk 12:18-27; Lk 20:27-40), the NT has little to say about principles of property transferral during Roman times.<\/p>\nIn the parable of the prodigal son, the younger son in the family requested his share of the inheritance (Lk 15:12). One should also note that the elder son, who with false piety looked down on his brother’s behavior, had not protested when his brother asked for the inheritance; on the contrary, the elder brother too, without complaining, received his share—presumably a double portion.<\/p>\nIn another significant passage (Gal 4:1-2) Paul, seeking to illustrate a theological point, refers to secular practices. An heir, he tells us, is subject to guardians and managers during his childhood, up to the time he actually inherits. The point Paul wants to establish is clear enough, but the illustration does not coincide with what we know of Roman law and unfortunately scholars have been unable to identify the precise social custom in view. It may be that Paul was making reference, in general rather than strict legal terms, to some practice with which he and the Galatians were familiar.<\/p>\nTheological Aspect<\/p>\n<h5>Canaan as Israel’s Inheritance<\/h5>\nThe conviction that God gave Palestine to the Israelites for their inheritance serves as a bridge between the historical and the theological data. The historical element lies in the obvious fact that the Promised Land, a physical entity, was certainly occupied by the Hebrews and distributed among their tribes. Theologically, however, the Scriptures speak of this occupation as a divine gift; in effect, even the method of distribution was based on the concept that the land belongs to God (Lv 25:23; see Ex 15:17; Jos 22:27; Ez 38:16; Jl 1:6).<\/p>\nThe theme goes back to Genesis 12:1-3. God, in choosing Abraham, instructed him to move to a new country and promised to make him a great and blessed nation (Heb 11:8). The significance of the land in this Abrahamic promise is made more explicit later, when we are told that God promised to give Canaan to Abraham’s descendants after four centuries of Egyptian bondage (Gn 15:12-21; see Acts 7:5).<\/p>\nSince Canaan was occupied by wicked inhabitants, the land was to be taken by force; to inherit the land therefore really means to take possession<\/em> of it. Israel must trust God, whose land it is, to give them the victory (Jos 1:1-9; 21:43-45; Jgs 7:2; Ps 44:1-3; Acts 13:19). Once they conquered the land, it was apportioned among the tribes according to their size (following the instructions in Nm 26:52-54). God further commanded the people to divide the land by lot (vv 55-56). Thus, from the initial promise to Abraham, to the actual apportionment of the land and even with reference to the future (Is 60:21; Ez 45:1-8; 47:13–48:29), the people were made fully aware that their inheritance lay in the hands of a sovereign Lord.<\/p>\n<h5>The Believer’s Inheritance<\/h5>\nIn the OT we find the concept of inheritance transferred from the purely physical to the spiritual. The tribe of Levi, which constituted the priestly clan, received no inheritance, because “the Lord is their inheritance” (Dt 18:1-2; see Nm 18:8-24). The Levites, in other words, received no land apportionment, but in their service to God they could begin to enjoy the fuller blessings to which the land inheritance pointed.<\/p>\nThat this truth could not be restricted to Levites is hinted at in Exodus 19:6, where the whole nation is called “a kingdom of priests” (see 1 Pt 2:9). Psalm 16 makes it clear that no one understood more clearly than David what those words entailed. Even if he were deprived of Israel’s physical inheritance, he had received by lot a more beautiful heritage, the Lord himself, in whose presence he found full joy and everlasting pleasures (Ps 16:5-6, 11; see also Pss 73:25-26; 142:5; Is 58:14; Lam 3:24).<\/p>\nIn later Judaism, during and after the intertestamental period, the figure was extended considerably. For example, the rabbis began to speak of the law as the inheritance of the faithful. Further, they might give the idea a negative turn, as when the wicked are said to inherit hell (cf. Jb 27:13). Neither of these figures is found in the NT.<\/p>\nWe also read in Jewish literature statements about inheriting the age to come, the kingdom, eternal life; these ideas occur frequently in the NT (Mt 19:29; 25:34; Lk 10:25; 18:18; 1 Cor 6:9-10; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; Ti 3:7; Jas 2:5). Such an inheritance, however, belongs only to those who are sanctified by God’s word (Acts 20:32; 26:18; Col 1:12; note also Jn 17:17; Col 3:23-24). These future blessings do not exclude the physical (Mt 5:5; note Ps 37:11, 29; Is 60:21; Rom 4:13; 2 Pt 3:13), but they certainly exclude human frailty, for God’s inheritance is imperishable (1 Cor 15:50). In short, our heritage is nothing less than full salvation (Heb 1:14; 11:7), which God carefully guards for us in heaven (1 Pt 1:4).<\/p>\nDoubtless, the most significant feature in the NT is its emphasis that, as a result of the work of Christ, his people begin even now<\/em> to receive the promised inheritance. The Gospel of John frequently stresses the present reality of eternal life, as does the Letter to the Hebrews (cf. 6:12-17 with 9:15 and 11:13, 39-40).<\/p>\nPaul treats this whole matter thoroughly in Galatians 3:7–4:7. In response to the Judaizers, who claim that the Abrahamic inheritance is restricted to those who become Jews through circumcision, Paul argues vigorously that Abraham’s true children are those who believe, whether Jew or Gentile (3:7; see Acts 26:16-18; Eph 3:6). They become heirs of God’s promise, for they receive the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The principle of inheritance is promise, not the Law (v 18). Those who believe are brought into union with Christ (vv 27-29); but then they are not merely Abraham’s children but God’s (v 26), for Christ is the Son of God and God has determined to send the Spirit of his Son to believers so that they too may call God Father<\/em> (Gal 4:4-7; see also Rom 8:15-16).<\/p>\nIndeed, Christ himself as the Son is the true heir (Mt 21:38; Mk 12:7; Lk 20:14); he has inherited a name above every name (Phil 2:9; Heb 1:4) and has been appointed heir of all things (Heb 1:2; see Ps 2:7-8; Mt 28:18). But by his grace, all who become his through faith are counted joint heirs with him (Rom 8:17).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Inheritance<\/h5>\nWith a bold shift in the metaphor, the Scriptures speak of believers as God’s inheritance. In the beautiful “Song of Moses” the author speaks of God as the Israelites’ Father (Dt 32:6), who has taken special interest in their inheritance (v 8). Then we are told why God cares: “For the Lord<\/span>’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance” (Dt 32:9, niv<\/span>). This theme becomes very prominent throughout the OT (e.g., Dt 9:26-29; 1 Kgs 8:51-53; Pss 28:9; 33:12; 74:2; Is 19:25; Jer 10:16; Zec 2:12). Elsewhere, Israel is spoken of as God’s special possession (e.g., Ex 19:5; Dt 7:6).<\/p>\nIn Ephesians 1:14 “the redemption of the possession” refers to the final salvation of believers, who are God’s treasure. Further, “we have obtained an inheritance” (Eph 1:11) may well be translated, “we have been made an inheritance,” that is, been “chosen as God’s portion,” a view supported by verse 18. No more fundamental idea than this can be found in Scripture, and its essence is expressed by the words of the One who sits on the throne: “He who conquers shall have this heritage, and I will be his God and he shall be my son” (Rv 21:7, rsv<\/span>; see Lv 26:11-12; 2 Sm 7:14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Adoption; Birthright; Firstborn; Heir.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INHERITANCE Legacy or bequest. Inheritance plays an unusually significant role in the Scriptures when it is used to convey theological truths. As we might expect, these theological applications reflect legal customs in force during OT and NT times. Legal and Historical Aspect The Patriarchs We learn something of early-second-millennium BC practices from the patriarchal stories in Genesis. For example, the narrative indicates that the firstborn could normally expect to receive the birthright. ...","summary_en":"INHERITANCE Legacy or bequest. Inheritance plays an unusually significant role in the Scriptures when it is used to convey theological truths. As we might expect, these theological applications reflect legal customs in force during OT and NT times. Legal and Historical Aspect The Patriarchs We learn something of early-second-millennium BC practices from the patriarchal stories in Genesis. For example, the narrative indicates that the firstborn could normally expect to receive the birthright. ...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":29506,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Pentecost","title_en":"Pentecost","content_ro":"<h3>PENTECOST<\/h3>\nWord derived from the Greek word pentekoste<\/span> (“fiftieth”), which stood for the festival celebrated on the 50th day after Passover. In the OT this festival, called Shavu‘oth<\/span> (Weeks) in Judaism, is referred to as the Feast of Weeks (Ex 34:22; Dt 16:10) because it occurs seven weeks after Passover. Other names include the Feast of Harvest (Ex 23:16), because of its relationship with harvest season, and the Day of Firstfruits (Nm 28:26), because two loaves of newly ground grain were presented before the Lord. (This latter name should be distinguished from the offering of firstfruits at the beginning of the harvest season, as mentioned in Lv 23:9-14.)<\/p>\nThe Feast of Weeks was one of three OT pilgrimage festivals when individuals were to appear before the Lord with gifts and offerings (Ex 23:14-17). The festival was primarily a harvest festival and celebrated the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest. Traditionally, grain harvest extended from Passover, when the first grain was cut (Dt 16:9) around mid-April, to Pentecost, which marked its conclusion in mid-June. Josephus’s statement that Pentecost was called “closing” illustrates this understanding (Antiquities<\/em> 3.10.6).<\/p>\nEach year the priest waved a sheaf of newly harvested grain before the Lord on the day after the Sabbath during the Festival of Unleavened Bread (the period of seven days following Passover). The people then counted 50 days from the offering of that first sheaf of grain until the day after the seventh Sabbath to observe the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:11). On this day two loaves, made of two-tenths of an ephah of flour and baked with yeast, were waved before the Lord (v 17) and freewill offerings were encouraged (Dt 16:10). This harvest festival was a time of great rejoicing and a holy assembly when no work was to be done (Lv 23:21; Dt 16:11). Observance of the Feast of Weeks during Solomon’s time (2 Chr 8:13) is the only OT reference outside of the Pentateuch, for Ezekiel makes no mention of it in his calendar for future festivals (Ez 45–46).<\/p>\nPentecost is first mentioned in the NT as the occasion for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the disciples of Christ, an event that many theologians understand as marking the beginning of the church (Acts 2:1). Since this was a required festival, Jews gathered from great distances to observe Pentecost in Jerusalem, making it an appropriate time for God’s work. On two occasions Paul takes into consideration the Festival of Pentecost when anticipating his travels. In the first instance he writes to the Corinthians about delaying his visit to them until after Pentecost (1 Cor 16:8), while later he was desirous of traveling to Jerusalem to get there in time for Pentecost (Acts 20:16).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Feasts and Festivals of Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PENTECOST<\/h3>\nWord derived from the Greek word pentekoste<\/span> (“fiftieth”), which stood for the festival celebrated on the 50th day after Passover. In the OT this festival, called Shavu‘oth<\/span> (Weeks) in Judaism, is referred to as the Feast of Weeks (Ex 34:22; Dt 16:10) because it occurs seven weeks after Passover. Other names include the Feast of Harvest (Ex 23:16), because of its relationship with harvest season, and the Day of Firstfruits (Nm 28:26), because two loaves of newly ground grain were presented before the Lord. (This latter name should be distinguished from the offering of firstfruits at the beginning of the harvest season, as mentioned in Lv 23:9-14.)<\/p>\nThe Feast of Weeks was one of three OT pilgrimage festivals when individuals were to appear before the Lord with gifts and offerings (Ex 23:14-17). The festival was primarily a harvest festival and celebrated the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest. Traditionally, grain harvest extended from Passover, when the first grain was cut (Dt 16:9) around mid-April, to Pentecost, which marked its conclusion in mid-June. Josephus’s statement that Pentecost was called “closing” illustrates this understanding (Antiquities<\/em> 3.10.6).<\/p>\nEach year the priest waved a sheaf of newly harvested grain before the Lord on the day after the Sabbath during the Festival of Unleavened Bread (the period of seven days following Passover). The people then counted 50 days from the offering of that first sheaf of grain until the day after the seventh Sabbath to observe the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:11). On this day two loaves, made of two-tenths of an ephah of flour and baked with yeast, were waved before the Lord (v 17) and freewill offerings were encouraged (Dt 16:10). This harvest festival was a time of great rejoicing and a holy assembly when no work was to be done (Lv 23:21; Dt 16:11). Observance of the Feast of Weeks during Solomon’s time (2 Chr 8:13) is the only OT reference outside of the Pentateuch, for Ezekiel makes no mention of it in his calendar for future festivals (Ez 45–46).<\/p>\nPentecost is first mentioned in the NT as the occasion for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the disciples of Christ, an event that many theologians understand as marking the beginning of the church (Acts 2:1). Since this was a required festival, Jews gathered from great distances to observe Pentecost in Jerusalem, making it an appropriate time for God’s work. On two occasions Paul takes into consideration the Festival of Pentecost when anticipating his travels. In the first instance he writes to the Corinthians about delaying his visit to them until after Pentecost (1 Cor 16:8), while later he was desirous of traveling to Jerusalem to get there in time for Pentecost (Acts 20:16).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Feasts and Festivals of Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PENTECOST Word derived from the Greek word pentekoste (“fiftieth”), which stood for the festival celebrated on the 50th day after Passover. In the OT this festival, called Shavu‘oth (Weeks) in Judaism, is referred to as the Feast of Weeks (Ex 34:22; Dt 16:10) because it occurs seven weeks after Passover. Other names include the Feast of Harvest (Ex 23:16), because of its relationship with harvest season, and the Day of Firstfruits (Nm 28:26), because two loaves of newly ground grain were pres...","summary_en":"PENTECOST Word derived from the Greek word pentekoste (“fiftieth”), which stood for the festival celebrated on the 50th day after Passover. In the OT this festival, called Shavu‘oth (Weeks) in Judaism, is referred to as the Feast of Weeks (Ex 34:22; Dt 16:10) because it occurs seven weeks after Passover. Other names include the Feast of Harvest (Ex 23:16), because of its relationship with harvest season, and the Day of Firstfruits (Nm 28:26), because two loaves of newly ground grain were pres...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":53378,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:1","content_ro":"45:1-8<\/strong> The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in the first place. It was a land in which God would dwell among his people. At the outset, therefore, the central part of the land would be assigned to the Lord as his holy portion<\/em>. The main purpose of this was to provide a zone of holiness and protection around the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"45:1-8<\/strong> The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in the first place. It was a land in which God would dwell among his people. At the outset, therefore, the central part of the land would be assigned to the Lord as his holy portion<\/em>. The main purpose of this was to provide a zone of holiness and protection around the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:1-8 The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in t...","summary_en":"45:1-8 The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in t...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":81004,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:1","content_ro":"45:1-8<\/strong> The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in the first place. It was a land in which God would dwell among his people. At the outset, therefore, the central part of the land would be assigned to the Lord as his holy portion<\/em>. The main purpose of this was to provide a zone of holiness and protection around the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"45:1-8<\/strong> The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in the first place. It was a land in which God would dwell among his people. At the outset, therefore, the central part of the land would be assigned to the Lord as his holy portion<\/em>. The main purpose of this was to provide a zone of holiness and protection around the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:1-8 The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in t...","summary_en":"45:1-8 The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in t...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108630,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:1","content_ro":"45:1-8<\/strong> The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in the first place. It was a land in which God would dwell among his people. At the outset, therefore, the central part of the land would be assigned to the Lord as his holy portion<\/em>. The main purpose of this was to provide a zone of holiness and protection around the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"45:1-8<\/strong> The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in the first place. It was a land in which God would dwell among his people. At the outset, therefore, the central part of the land would be assigned to the Lord as his holy portion<\/em>. The main purpose of this was to provide a zone of holiness and protection around the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:1-8 The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in t...","summary_en":"45:1-8 The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in t...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136256,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:1","content_ro":"45:1-8<\/strong> The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in the first place. It was a land in which God would dwell among his people. At the outset, therefore, the central part of the land would be assigned to the Lord as his holy portion<\/em>. The main purpose of this was to provide a zone of holiness and protection around the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"45:1-8<\/strong> The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in the first place. It was a land in which God would dwell among his people. At the outset, therefore, the central part of the land would be assigned to the Lord as his holy portion<\/em>. The main purpose of this was to provide a zone of holiness and protection around the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:1-8 The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in t...","summary_en":"45:1-8 The division of the restored Promised Land among the tribes is described in detail in chs 47–48, but the central sacred section is described here because it included the area set aside for the priests to live in. Regaining a share in the land was a pressing concern for the exiles at a time when they had none. Ezekiel’s interest, however, was not simply in promising that the land would be divided among them in a fair way. He wanted to remind them of what the Promised Land was about in t...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":53379,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:3","content_ro":"45:3-4<\/strong> Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"45:3-4<\/strong> Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:3-4 Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests.","summary_en":"45:3-4 Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":81005,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:3","content_ro":"45:3-4<\/strong> Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"45:3-4<\/strong> Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:3-4 Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests.","summary_en":"45:3-4 Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108631,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:3","content_ro":"45:3-4<\/strong> Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"45:3-4<\/strong> Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:3-4 Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests.","summary_en":"45:3-4 Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136257,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:3","content_ro":"45:3-4<\/strong> Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"45:3-4<\/strong> Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:3-4 Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests.","summary_en":"45:3-4 Within this holy portion, the Temple complex would form the Most Holy Place at the heart of a sacred square. Just as the Most Holy Place in the Temple was protected by an inner court that only the priests could enter, the Temple complex was surrounded by a section reserved only for priests.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":53380,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:5","content_ro":"45:5-6<\/strong> To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites<\/em>;<\/em> to the south (48:15), the city<\/em> was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81<\/sup>\/<\/em>3<\/sub> miles on a side.<\/p>","content_en":"45:5-6<\/strong> To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites<\/em>;<\/em> to the south (48:15), the city<\/em> was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81<\/sup>\/<\/em>3<\/sub> miles on a side.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:5-6 To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites; to the south (48:15), the city was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81\/3 miles on a side.","summary_en":"45:5-6 To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites; to the south (48:15), the city was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81\/3 miles on a side.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":81006,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:5","content_ro":"45:5-6<\/strong> To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites<\/em>;<\/em> to the south (48:15), the city<\/em> was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81<\/sup>\/<\/em>3<\/sub> miles on a side.<\/p>","content_en":"45:5-6<\/strong> To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites<\/em>;<\/em> to the south (48:15), the city<\/em> was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81<\/sup>\/<\/em>3<\/sub> miles on a side.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:5-6 To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites; to the south (48:15), the city was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81\/3 miles on a side.","summary_en":"45:5-6 To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites; to the south (48:15), the city was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81\/3 miles on a side.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108632,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:5","content_ro":"45:5-6<\/strong> To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites<\/em>;<\/em> to the south (48:15), the city<\/em> was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81<\/sup>\/<\/em>3<\/sub> miles on a side.<\/p>","content_en":"45:5-6<\/strong> To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites<\/em>;<\/em> to the south (48:15), the city<\/em> was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81<\/sup>\/<\/em>3<\/sub> miles on a side.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:5-6 To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites; to the south (48:15), the city was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81\/3 miles on a side.","summary_en":"45:5-6 To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites; to the south (48:15), the city was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81\/3 miles on a side.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136258,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:5","content_ro":"45:5-6<\/strong> To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites<\/em>;<\/em> to the south (48:15), the city<\/em> was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81<\/sup>\/<\/em>3<\/sub> miles on a side.<\/p>","content_en":"45:5-6<\/strong> To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites<\/em>;<\/em> to the south (48:15), the city<\/em> was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81<\/sup>\/<\/em>3<\/sub> miles on a side.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:5-6 To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites; to the south (48:15), the city was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81\/3 miles on a side.","summary_en":"45:5-6 To the north of this priestly strip was an area reserved for the Levites; to the south (48:15), the city was located on a half-size strip. The result was a square that was 81\/3 miles on a side.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":53381,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:7","content_ro":"45:7<\/strong> On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince<\/em>. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the new economy, but they would no longer be at the center. The Lord was Israel’s King, and his dwelling place would be the hub of their existence.<\/p>","content_en":"45:7<\/strong> On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince<\/em>. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the new economy, but they would no longer be at the center. The Lord was Israel’s King, and his dwelling place would be the hub of their existence.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:7 On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the ...","summary_en":"45:7 On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":81007,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:7","content_ro":"45:7<\/strong> On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince<\/em>. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the new economy, but they would no longer be at the center. The Lord was Israel’s King, and his dwelling place would be the hub of their existence.<\/p>","content_en":"45:7<\/strong> On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince<\/em>. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the new economy, but they would no longer be at the center. The Lord was Israel’s King, and his dwelling place would be the hub of their existence.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:7 On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the ...","summary_en":"45:7 On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108633,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:7","content_ro":"45:7<\/strong> On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince<\/em>. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the new economy, but they would no longer be at the center. The Lord was Israel’s King, and his dwelling place would be the hub of their existence.<\/p>","content_en":"45:7<\/strong> On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince<\/em>. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the new economy, but they would no longer be at the center. The Lord was Israel’s King, and his dwelling place would be the hub of their existence.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:7 On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the ...","summary_en":"45:7 On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136259,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:7","content_ro":"45:7<\/strong> On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince<\/em>. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the new economy, but they would no longer be at the center. The Lord was Israel’s King, and his dwelling place would be the hub of their existence.<\/p>","content_en":"45:7<\/strong> On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince<\/em>. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the new economy, but they would no longer be at the center. The Lord was Israel’s King, and his dwelling place would be the hub of their existence.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:7 On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the ...","summary_en":"45:7 On both sides of the larger sacred area (45:1-6), the remainder of the holy portion was assigned to the prince. The same principle of graded access that operated in the Temple was applied more broadly to the surrounding land. The Temple would be the geographical and spiritual heart of the new Israel. The land would be divided into strips running east to west, orienting the whole nation along the sacred east–west axis of the Temple. The city and the prince would still be important in the ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":53382,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:8","content_ro":"45:8-9<\/strong> One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress<\/em> and rob<\/em> the people<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"45:8-9<\/strong> One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress<\/em> and rob<\/em> the people<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:8-9 One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress and rob the people.","summary_en":"45:8-9 One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress and rob the people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":81008,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:8","content_ro":"45:8-9<\/strong> One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress<\/em> and rob<\/em> the people<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"45:8-9<\/strong> One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress<\/em> and rob<\/em> the people<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:8-9 One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress and rob the people.","summary_en":"45:8-9 One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress and rob the people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108634,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:8","content_ro":"45:8-9<\/strong> One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress<\/em> and rob<\/em> the people<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"45:8-9<\/strong> One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress<\/em> and rob<\/em> the people<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:8-9 One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress and rob the people.","summary_en":"45:8-9 One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress and rob the people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136260,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:8","content_ro":"45:8-9<\/strong> One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress<\/em> and rob<\/em> the people<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"45:8-9<\/strong> One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress<\/em> and rob<\/em> the people<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:8-9 One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress and rob the people.","summary_en":"45:8-9 One tangible expression of the Lord’s kingly rule was that he distributed the land to the prince as well as to the people. The prince was assigned a large enough piece of his own land to meet his needs and to allow him to support the ministry of the Temple without having to oppress and rob the people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":60851,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"True Justice","title_en":"True Justice","content_ro":"<h3>True Justice<\/h3>\nThe community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them?<\/p>\nEvery society has social structures that separate the powerful from the weak and the privileged from the ill-favored. This was true of Old Testament Israel despite its unique constitution and commission as a “holy nation” (Exod 19:6). Judges and other officials charged with upholding the law might tend to favor individuals with financial means, high social standing, or community influence, especially when these individuals offer bribes (Deut 16:19). However, God cannot be bribed, nor does he show partiality (10:17). The rich and the poor, the powerful and the weak, the exalted and the downtrodden are all alike to him.<\/p>\nThe prophets of Israel understood the need for equity and justice and often called for the application of these principles to community and national life (Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 59:14-19; Ezek 22:23-29; Amos 2:6-8; Hab 1:4). The New Testament also appeals for proper treatment of the poor and disadvantaged and speaks of God’s displeasure when they are neglected (Matt 23:23; 2 Cor 9:6-10; Jas 2:1-7).<\/p>\nJustice that falls short of God’s standard is not true justice, and those responsible for corrupting justice can expect full retribution from the Judge of all the earth (see Deut 25:13-16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 23:3; Lev 19:15; Deut 10:17-19; 16:19; 24:12-22; 25:13-16; 27:19; Ps 82:1-5; Prov 11:1; Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 11:3-4; 59:14-19; Jer 22:13-17; Ezek 22:23-29; 45:9-10; Amos 2:6-8; 8:5-6; Hab 1:4; Matt 23:23; Luke 18:6-8; Jas 2:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>True Justice<\/h3>\nThe community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them?<\/p>\nEvery society has social structures that separate the powerful from the weak and the privileged from the ill-favored. This was true of Old Testament Israel despite its unique constitution and commission as a “holy nation” (Exod 19:6). Judges and other officials charged with upholding the law might tend to favor individuals with financial means, high social standing, or community influence, especially when these individuals offer bribes (Deut 16:19). However, God cannot be bribed, nor does he show partiality (10:17). The rich and the poor, the powerful and the weak, the exalted and the downtrodden are all alike to him.<\/p>\nThe prophets of Israel understood the need for equity and justice and often called for the application of these principles to community and national life (Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 59:14-19; Ezek 22:23-29; Amos 2:6-8; Hab 1:4). The New Testament also appeals for proper treatment of the poor and disadvantaged and speaks of God’s displeasure when they are neglected (Matt 23:23; 2 Cor 9:6-10; Jas 2:1-7).<\/p>\nJustice that falls short of God’s standard is not true justice, and those responsible for corrupting justice can expect full retribution from the Judge of all the earth (see Deut 25:13-16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 23:3; Lev 19:15; Deut 10:17-19; 16:19; 24:12-22; 25:13-16; 27:19; Ps 82:1-5; Prov 11:1; Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 11:3-4; 59:14-19; Jer 22:13-17; Ezek 22:23-29; 45:9-10; Amos 2:6-8; 8:5-6; Hab 1:4; Matt 23:23; Luke 18:6-8; Jas 2:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"True Justice The community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them? Every s...","summary_en":"True Justice The community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them? Every s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88477,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"True Justice","title_en":"True Justice","content_ro":"<h3>True Justice<\/h3>\nThe community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them?<\/p>\nEvery society has social structures that separate the powerful from the weak and the privileged from the ill-favored. This was true of Old Testament Israel despite its unique constitution and commission as a “holy nation” (Exod 19:6). Judges and other officials charged with upholding the law might tend to favor individuals with financial means, high social standing, or community influence, especially when these individuals offer bribes (Deut 16:19). However, God cannot be bribed, nor does he show partiality (10:17). The rich and the poor, the powerful and the weak, the exalted and the downtrodden are all alike to him.<\/p>\nThe prophets of Israel understood the need for equity and justice and often called for the application of these principles to community and national life (Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 59:14-19; Ezek 22:23-29; Amos 2:6-8; Hab 1:4). The New Testament also appeals for proper treatment of the poor and disadvantaged and speaks of God’s displeasure when they are neglected (Matt 23:23; 2 Cor 9:6-10; Jas 2:1-7).<\/p>\nJustice that falls short of God’s standard is not true justice, and those responsible for corrupting justice can expect full retribution from the Judge of all the earth (see Deut 25:13-16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 23:3; Lev 19:15; Deut 10:17-19; 16:19; 24:12-22; 25:13-16; 27:19; Ps 82:1-5; Prov 11:1; Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 11:3-4; 59:14-19; Jer 22:13-17; Ezek 22:23-29; 45:9-10; Amos 2:6-8; 8:5-6; Hab 1:4; Matt 23:23; Luke 18:6-8; Jas 2:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>True Justice<\/h3>\nThe community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them?<\/p>\nEvery society has social structures that separate the powerful from the weak and the privileged from the ill-favored. This was true of Old Testament Israel despite its unique constitution and commission as a “holy nation” (Exod 19:6). Judges and other officials charged with upholding the law might tend to favor individuals with financial means, high social standing, or community influence, especially when these individuals offer bribes (Deut 16:19). However, God cannot be bribed, nor does he show partiality (10:17). The rich and the poor, the powerful and the weak, the exalted and the downtrodden are all alike to him.<\/p>\nThe prophets of Israel understood the need for equity and justice and often called for the application of these principles to community and national life (Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 59:14-19; Ezek 22:23-29; Amos 2:6-8; Hab 1:4). The New Testament also appeals for proper treatment of the poor and disadvantaged and speaks of God’s displeasure when they are neglected (Matt 23:23; 2 Cor 9:6-10; Jas 2:1-7).<\/p>\nJustice that falls short of God’s standard is not true justice, and those responsible for corrupting justice can expect full retribution from the Judge of all the earth (see Deut 25:13-16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 23:3; Lev 19:15; Deut 10:17-19; 16:19; 24:12-22; 25:13-16; 27:19; Ps 82:1-5; Prov 11:1; Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 11:3-4; 59:14-19; Jer 22:13-17; Ezek 22:23-29; 45:9-10; Amos 2:6-8; 8:5-6; Hab 1:4; Matt 23:23; Luke 18:6-8; Jas 2:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"True Justice The community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them? Every s...","summary_en":"True Justice The community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them? Every s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116103,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"True Justice","title_en":"True Justice","content_ro":"<h3>True Justice<\/h3>\nThe community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them?<\/p>\nEvery society has social structures that separate the powerful from the weak and the privileged from the ill-favored. This was true of Old Testament Israel despite its unique constitution and commission as a “holy nation” (Exod 19:6). Judges and other officials charged with upholding the law might tend to favor individuals with financial means, high social standing, or community influence, especially when these individuals offer bribes (Deut 16:19). However, God cannot be bribed, nor does he show partiality (10:17). The rich and the poor, the powerful and the weak, the exalted and the downtrodden are all alike to him.<\/p>\nThe prophets of Israel understood the need for equity and justice and often called for the application of these principles to community and national life (Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 59:14-19; Ezek 22:23-29; Amos 2:6-8; Hab 1:4). The New Testament also appeals for proper treatment of the poor and disadvantaged and speaks of God’s displeasure when they are neglected (Matt 23:23; 2 Cor 9:6-10; Jas 2:1-7).<\/p>\nJustice that falls short of God’s standard is not true justice, and those responsible for corrupting justice can expect full retribution from the Judge of all the earth (see Deut 25:13-16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 23:3; Lev 19:15; Deut 10:17-19; 16:19; 24:12-22; 25:13-16; 27:19; Ps 82:1-5; Prov 11:1; Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 11:3-4; 59:14-19; Jer 22:13-17; Ezek 22:23-29; 45:9-10; Amos 2:6-8; 8:5-6; Hab 1:4; Matt 23:23; Luke 18:6-8; Jas 2:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>True Justice<\/h3>\nThe community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them?<\/p>\nEvery society has social structures that separate the powerful from the weak and the privileged from the ill-favored. This was true of Old Testament Israel despite its unique constitution and commission as a “holy nation” (Exod 19:6). Judges and other officials charged with upholding the law might tend to favor individuals with financial means, high social standing, or community influence, especially when these individuals offer bribes (Deut 16:19). However, God cannot be bribed, nor does he show partiality (10:17). The rich and the poor, the powerful and the weak, the exalted and the downtrodden are all alike to him.<\/p>\nThe prophets of Israel understood the need for equity and justice and often called for the application of these principles to community and national life (Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 59:14-19; Ezek 22:23-29; Amos 2:6-8; Hab 1:4). The New Testament also appeals for proper treatment of the poor and disadvantaged and speaks of God’s displeasure when they are neglected (Matt 23:23; 2 Cor 9:6-10; Jas 2:1-7).<\/p>\nJustice that falls short of God’s standard is not true justice, and those responsible for corrupting justice can expect full retribution from the Judge of all the earth (see Deut 25:13-16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 23:3; Lev 19:15; Deut 10:17-19; 16:19; 24:12-22; 25:13-16; 27:19; Ps 82:1-5; Prov 11:1; Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 11:3-4; 59:14-19; Jer 22:13-17; Ezek 22:23-29; 45:9-10; Amos 2:6-8; 8:5-6; Hab 1:4; Matt 23:23; Luke 18:6-8; Jas 2:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"True Justice The community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them? Every s...","summary_en":"True Justice The community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them? Every s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143729,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"True Justice","title_en":"True Justice","content_ro":"<h3>True Justice<\/h3>\nThe community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them?<\/p>\nEvery society has social structures that separate the powerful from the weak and the privileged from the ill-favored. This was true of Old Testament Israel despite its unique constitution and commission as a “holy nation” (Exod 19:6). Judges and other officials charged with upholding the law might tend to favor individuals with financial means, high social standing, or community influence, especially when these individuals offer bribes (Deut 16:19). However, God cannot be bribed, nor does he show partiality (10:17). The rich and the poor, the powerful and the weak, the exalted and the downtrodden are all alike to him.<\/p>\nThe prophets of Israel understood the need for equity and justice and often called for the application of these principles to community and national life (Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 59:14-19; Ezek 22:23-29; Amos 2:6-8; Hab 1:4). The New Testament also appeals for proper treatment of the poor and disadvantaged and speaks of God’s displeasure when they are neglected (Matt 23:23; 2 Cor 9:6-10; Jas 2:1-7).<\/p>\nJustice that falls short of God’s standard is not true justice, and those responsible for corrupting justice can expect full retribution from the Judge of all the earth (see Deut 25:13-16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 23:3; Lev 19:15; Deut 10:17-19; 16:19; 24:12-22; 25:13-16; 27:19; Ps 82:1-5; Prov 11:1; Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 11:3-4; 59:14-19; Jer 22:13-17; Ezek 22:23-29; 45:9-10; Amos 2:6-8; 8:5-6; Hab 1:4; Matt 23:23; Luke 18:6-8; Jas 2:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>True Justice<\/h3>\nThe community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them?<\/p>\nEvery society has social structures that separate the powerful from the weak and the privileged from the ill-favored. This was true of Old Testament Israel despite its unique constitution and commission as a “holy nation” (Exod 19:6). Judges and other officials charged with upholding the law might tend to favor individuals with financial means, high social standing, or community influence, especially when these individuals offer bribes (Deut 16:19). However, God cannot be bribed, nor does he show partiality (10:17). The rich and the poor, the powerful and the weak, the exalted and the downtrodden are all alike to him.<\/p>\nThe prophets of Israel understood the need for equity and justice and often called for the application of these principles to community and national life (Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 59:14-19; Ezek 22:23-29; Amos 2:6-8; Hab 1:4). The New Testament also appeals for proper treatment of the poor and disadvantaged and speaks of God’s displeasure when they are neglected (Matt 23:23; 2 Cor 9:6-10; Jas 2:1-7).<\/p>\nJustice that falls short of God’s standard is not true justice, and those responsible for corrupting justice can expect full retribution from the Judge of all the earth (see Deut 25:13-16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 23:3; Lev 19:15; Deut 10:17-19; 16:19; 24:12-22; 25:13-16; 27:19; Ps 82:1-5; Prov 11:1; Isa 1:17; 10:1-4; 11:3-4; 59:14-19; Jer 22:13-17; Ezek 22:23-29; 45:9-10; Amos 2:6-8; 8:5-6; Hab 1:4; Matt 23:23; Luke 18:6-8; Jas 2:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"True Justice The community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them? Every s...","summary_en":"True Justice The community of God’s people in Old Testament Israel was to be responsible for the well-being of widows, orphans, and foreigners (Deut 27:19). The Israelites were to represent the just God whom they served (see 10:17-19) and always remember that they had been an enslaved and defenseless people in Egypt (see 10:19; 24:18-22). How could they, the beneficiaries of God’s unfailing love and faithfulness, ignore the rights and needs of the most vulnerable who lived among them? Every s...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":3539,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Balances Balance","title_en":"Balances Balance","content_ro":"<h3>BALANCE, BALANCES<\/h3>\nDevices used to weigh an object by opposing it with a known weight. Balances or scales have been used to measure weight since at least the middle of the second millennium BC<\/span>. Pictures and inscriptions in Egyptian tombs give us an idea of the appearance of the earliest scales. A pair of such balances found in Ugarit dates from about 1400 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nBalances usually consisted of four main parts: (1) an upright center standard, (2) a crossbar suspended from it, (3) two pans suspended from each end of the crossbar by cords, and (4) on the more elaborate models, a rod or pointer attached to the center of the crossbar at right angles to it. The rod moved in front of the standard so that when the two pans held equal weights the exact vertical position of the rod would be evident.<\/p>\nScales or balances were used in the ancient world primarily to measure precious metals such as silver or gold. The “Story of the Eloquent Peasant,” dating from the Middle Kingdom of Egypt, however, mentioned the figurative measuring of a person’s heart and tongue.<\/p>\nBalances are mentioned frequently in the OT, with much emphasis on the use of just weights in commerce (Lv 19:36; Prv 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ez 45:10; Hos 12:7; Am 8:5; Mi 6:10-12). The weighing of silver with a balance is described (Is 46:6), as when Jeremiah weighed the money that he paid for his nephew’s field (Jer 32:8-10). In an acted-out prophecy, Ezekiel was told to cut off all his hair and beard and weigh it in balances to separate it into three equal parts (Ez 5:1-2). Job asked to be “weighed in a just balance,” that God might know his integrity (Jb 31:6). Daniel said that Belshazzar had been weighed in the balances (judged) and found wanting (Dn 5:27). One reference to scales or balances is found in the NT, in Revelation 6:5, which speaks of a rider (on a black horse) having a balance in his hand. The prophecy is of severe famine, when some foods can no longer be obtained, when inflation has driven up food prices, and when people check the scales carefully to be sure they are not cheated when buying even the cheapest grains, such as barley (Rv 6:6).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Weights and Measures.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BALANCE, BALANCES<\/h3>\nDevices used to weigh an object by opposing it with a known weight. Balances or scales have been used to measure weight since at least the middle of the second millennium BC<\/span>. Pictures and inscriptions in Egyptian tombs give us an idea of the appearance of the earliest scales. A pair of such balances found in Ugarit dates from about 1400 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nBalances usually consisted of four main parts: (1) an upright center standard, (2) a crossbar suspended from it, (3) two pans suspended from each end of the crossbar by cords, and (4) on the more elaborate models, a rod or pointer attached to the center of the crossbar at right angles to it. The rod moved in front of the standard so that when the two pans held equal weights the exact vertical position of the rod would be evident.<\/p>\nScales or balances were used in the ancient world primarily to measure precious metals such as silver or gold. The “Story of the Eloquent Peasant,” dating from the Middle Kingdom of Egypt, however, mentioned the figurative measuring of a person’s heart and tongue.<\/p>\nBalances are mentioned frequently in the OT, with much emphasis on the use of just weights in commerce (Lv 19:36; Prv 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ez 45:10; Hos 12:7; Am 8:5; Mi 6:10-12). The weighing of silver with a balance is described (Is 46:6), as when Jeremiah weighed the money that he paid for his nephew’s field (Jer 32:8-10). In an acted-out prophecy, Ezekiel was told to cut off all his hair and beard and weigh it in balances to separate it into three equal parts (Ez 5:1-2). Job asked to be “weighed in a just balance,” that God might know his integrity (Jb 31:6). Daniel said that Belshazzar had been weighed in the balances (judged) and found wanting (Dn 5:27). One reference to scales or balances is found in the NT, in Revelation 6:5, which speaks of a rider (on a black horse) having a balance in his hand. The prophecy is of severe famine, when some foods can no longer be obtained, when inflation has driven up food prices, and when people check the scales carefully to be sure they are not cheated when buying even the cheapest grains, such as barley (Rv 6:6).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Weights and Measures.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BALANCE, BALANCES Devices used to weigh an object by opposing it with a known weight. Balances or scales have been used to measure weight since at least the middle of the second millennium BC. Pictures and inscriptions in Egyptian tombs give us an idea of the appearance of the earliest scales. A pair of such balances found in Ugarit dates from about 1400 BC. Balances usually consisted of four main parts: (1) an upright center standard, (2) a crossbar suspended from it, (3) two pans suspended ...","summary_en":"BALANCE, BALANCES Devices used to weigh an object by opposing it with a known weight. Balances or scales have been used to measure weight since at least the middle of the second millennium BC. Pictures and inscriptions in Egyptian tombs give us an idea of the appearance of the earliest scales. A pair of such balances found in Ugarit dates from about 1400 BC. Balances usually consisted of four main parts: (1) an upright center standard, (2) a crossbar suspended from it, (3) two pans suspended ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":3916,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bath","title_en":"Bath","content_ro":"<h3>BATH<\/h3>\nUnit of liquid measure in the OT (Ez 45:10-11), equal to about six gallons (23 liters). See<\/em> Weights and Measures.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BATH<\/h3>\nUnit of liquid measure in the OT (Ez 45:10-11), equal to about six gallons (23 liters). See<\/em> Weights and Measures.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BATH Unit of liquid measure in the OT (Ez 45:10-11), equal to about six gallons (23 liters). See Weights and Measures.","summary_en":"BATH Unit of liquid measure in the OT (Ez 45:10-11), equal to about six gallons (23 liters). See Weights and Measures.","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":53383,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:10","content_ro":"45:10-12<\/strong> When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"45:10-12<\/strong> When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:10-12 When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.","summary_en":"45:10-12 When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":81009,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:10","content_ro":"45:10-12<\/strong> When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"45:10-12<\/strong> When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:10-12 When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.","summary_en":"45:10-12 When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108635,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:10","content_ro":"45:10-12<\/strong> When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"45:10-12<\/strong> When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:10-12 When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.","summary_en":"45:10-12 When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136261,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:10","content_ro":"45:10-12<\/strong> When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"45:10-12<\/strong> When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:10-12 When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.","summary_en":"45:10-12 When the prince gathered the offerings of the people for the Temple (see 45:13-17), he was not to adjust the scales so that he profited from the difference between what he took in from the people and what he gave out for the ministry of the Temple.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":28292,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\nMajor ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nPerformance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\nThe grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\nThe sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\nThe second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\nThe burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\nThe order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\nEach section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\nIn other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\nWhen prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\nFor sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\nThe description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\nThe same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\nThe book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\nThe same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\nThe procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\nDescription of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\nThese two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\nThe offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\nThe choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\nThese rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\nBurnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\nExcept for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\nThe great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\nCertain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\nA grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\nPeace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\nA special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\nDrink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\nThese sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\nThe first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\nThe priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\nThe ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\nOnly three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\nMajor ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nPerformance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\nThe grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\nThe sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\nThe second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\nThe burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\nThe order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\nEach section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\nIn other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\nWhen prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\nFor sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\nThe description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\nThe same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\nThe book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\nThe same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\nThe procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\nDescription of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\nThese two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\nThe offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\nThe choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\nThese rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\nBurnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\nExcept for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\nThe great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\nCertain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\nA grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\nPeace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\nA special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\nDrink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\nThese sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\nThe first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\nThe priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\nThe ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\nOnly three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38301,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Weights and Measures","title_en":"Weights and Measures","content_ro":"<h3>WEIGHTS AND MEASURES<\/h3>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Introduction<\/p>\n• Weight Measures<\/p>\n• Linear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Linear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\n• Liquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Liquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\nIntroduction<\/p>\nUnits of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While this was a convenient system, it also suffered from a lack of standardization. Some arms were longer than others, and some donkeys could carry more than others. The history of weights and measures, therefore, becomes the story of seeking standards. This was not achieved in the OT but began to take place under Greek and Roman influences in NT times.<\/p>\nIn the OT the measures that were used are frequently attested to in Mesopotamian, Egyptian, and Canaanite literature as well. The Israelites did not have their own unique set of measurements. Yet while the terms are shared, it is not unusual to find a particular term having one value in Israel and a noticeably different value in one of the other cultures.<\/p>\nBy the time of the NT, other variables were added. The Israelites of this period were still using many of the measures that had been used and developed throughout the OT period. But added to that were the Greek and Roman systems of measurement. Sometimes these terms were adopted wholesale, while at other times Hebrew terms were adapted to Greco-Roman standards. On still other occasions, the Roman terms were apparently used when dealing with the government, whereas Hebrew terms were still used in everyday practice.<\/p>\nIn most of the kinds of measurement, the base unit (i.e., the one that all of the others are fractions or multiples of) is the one about which there is the most uncertainty. So the cubit (length), the shekel (weight), the homer (dry volume), and the bath (liquid volume) are all to some degree uncertain. This makes all of the other measures based on them equally uncertain.<\/p>\nWeight Measures<\/p>\nThe terms used for weights have benefited most from archaeological discoveries. Excavations provide stone weights that are occasionally inscribed with the unit they represent. When the stones are weighed, they frequently give a range of weights that have only a general consistency. However, comparing this data with that provided by the text has given the basis for fairly accurate determinations. The relative scale in any given location is more important than absolute values.<\/p>\n\nThere was standardization of weight measures, but precision was difficult to attain. The Israelite system is similar to that used by the Mesopotamians and the Canaanites. For most of the OT period, the weights system provided the monetary system. Minted coinage was the invention of the Persians. Up until that time, silver or gold or any other trading commodity had to be weighed out so that bartering or purchasing could take place. This made the weights system the core of the ancient economy. It also explains why the Scriptures speak so seriously against the use of false weights (Lv 19:36; Dt 25:13; Prv 16:11; 20:10, 23; Mi 6:11; Hos 12:7; Am 8:5).<\/p>\nStone weights were used on a set of balances for conducting business in the ancient marketplace. Scales or balances are mentioned half a dozen times in the OT, but none of those are in actual economic contexts (Jb 6:2; 31:6; Ps 62:9; Is 40:12; Ez 5:1; Dn 5:27). The scales used were generally of the beam-balance type with dishes on each end.<\/p>\n<h5>Talent<\/h5>\nAccording to Exodus 38:25-26 the talent must have been equal to 3,000 shekels. (A hundred talents would then have been equal to 300,000 shekels, and if that is added to the 1,175 shekels in verse 25, the total is 301,775, or half a shekel for each of the 603,550 men—as verse 26 states.) Excavated talents weigh from about 65 to 80 pounds (29.5 to 36.3 kilograms). In the OT the talent is used only for precious metals, usually silver or gold. According to 1 Kings 10:14, the annual tribute income of Solomon’s kingdom was 666 talents, which apparently was considered quite extravagant. David bequeathed 100,000 talents of gold and 1,000,000 talents of silver to Solomon for the building of the temple (1 Chr 22:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Mina<\/h5>\nIn the Canaanite material from Ugarit the mina equals 50 shekels, while in Babylon the mina equals 60 shekels. In Ezekiel 45:12, the mina is set at 60 shekels, but it is unclear whether this represents a change from previous standards.<\/p>\n<h5>Shekel<\/h5>\nThe shekel was the basic unit of weight. Besides the regular shekel, there was a “royal” shekel (2 Sm 14:26). Calculating by weights that have been excavated and found labeled as “beka” (one-half shekel), the shekel has been estimated to be about .4 ounce (11.4 grams).<\/p>\nThe shekel is used in Scripture almost exclusively in contexts dealing with monetary value. Whether silver, gold, barley, or flour, the shekel valuation assigns the commodity a relative value in the economy. Exceptions to this are Goliath’s armor and spear (1 Sm 17:5-7), which are described in terms of their shekel weight.<\/p>\n<h5>Pim<\/h5>\nThe only reference to this unit is in 1 Samuel 13:21, where it is the price charged to the Israelites by the Philistines for sharpening a plowshare. Excavated weights range from .25 to .3 ounce (7.1 to 8.5 grams), suggesting that the pim was two-thirds of a shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Beka<\/h5>\nSeven stones inscribed with this label range in weight from .2 to .23 ounce (5.7 to 6.5 grams). In Exodus 38:26 it is the amount levied on each individual for the census tax. There it is the equivalent of one-half shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Gerah<\/h5>\nEqual to one-twentieth of a shekel, or .02 ounce (.6 gram). The term is used five times (Ex 30:13; Lv 27:25; Nm 3:47; 18:16; Ez 45:12) and on each occasion is used to give a valuation to the shekel. Its use is strictly monetary in these contexts.<\/p>\n<h5>Litra<\/h5>\nThe NT uses the same weights that have already been identified in the OT usage, particularly the shekel, mina, and talent. There is one additional unit used: the litra, which is used in John 12:3 and 19:39 with regard to spices. In Greek literature one litra is approximately 12 ounces (327 grams).<\/p>\nLinear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\nMeasurements of length and depth generally were derived from a part of the body used to make the measurement. The basic unit was the cubit, and most others were related to it. Precise measurements of geographic distance are lacking in the OT and was most frequently stated in terms of the number of days it would take to arrive at a destination. A single day’s journey was mostly likely 20 to 25 miles (32.2 to 40.2 kilometers). A “pace” was equal to a “step”—about a yard (2 Sm 6:13).<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\nThe length from the tip of the forefinger to the elbow. There are both long and short cubits, which are used not only in Israel but in Mesopotamia and Egypt as well. Ezekiel 40:5 identifies the long cubit as being the equivalent of a cubit plus a handbreadth (about 20 to 21 inches, or 50.8 to 53.3 centimeters). The inscription found inside the Siloam tunnel built by Hezekiah (715–686 BC<\/span>) indicates that the tunnel is 1,200 cubits long. The actual length of the tunnel was determined to be 1,749 feet (533.1 meters). This would yield a cubit of 17.49 inches (44.4 centimeters). All things considered, 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters) is a good estimation of the length of the cubit in Israel. This would set the long cubit at approximately 20.5 inches (52.1 centimeters). The cubit was most frequently used to give the dimensions of buildings or objects (e.g., curtains, pillars, pieces of furniture, etc.). The largest structure measured in cubits was the ark that Noah built, which was 300 cubits long (Gn 6:15).<\/p>\n<h5>Span<\/h5>\nThe distance measured by the stretch of the hand from fingertip to fingertip, equal to one-half a cubit, or eight and three-quarters inches (22.2 centimeters). It is used only seven times in the OT, and four of those are to describe the dimensions of the high priest’s breastplate (Ex 28:15-16; 39:8-9).<\/p>\n<h5>Handbreadth<\/h5>\nThe width of the hand at the base, equal to one-sixth of a cubit, one-third of a span, or just under three inches (7.6 centimeters). The term is used only five times and gives the width of the rim around the table of showbread (Ex 25:25) and Solomon’s molten sea (1 Kgs 7:26).<\/p>\nLinear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\nIn the NT some of the units of length and depth represent Greco-Roman standards, while others are those used in the OT. Like the OT, the NT frequently uses imprecise designations for distance, such as a stone’s throw or a day’s journey. There are, however, a few occurrences of precise terms borrowed from Roman culture.<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\nFor the Romans, the cubit was set at one and a half times their standard foot of 11.66 inches, equaling 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters), just as the OT cubit.<\/p>\n<h5>Fathom<\/h5>\nThe distance between the fingertips of the left and right hand when the arms were outstretched. It is used only in Acts 27:28 and is considered to be about six feet (1.8 meters).<\/p>\n<h5>Furlong\/Stadium<\/h5>\nThe length of the ancient Greek racecourse, equal to one-eighth of a Roman mile, or a little over 200 yards (182.9 meters). It is usually used to give approximate distance, but in Revelation 21:16 it is used to give the dimensions of the New Jerusalem and is measured with a measuring rod.<\/p>\n<h5>Mile<\/h5>\nThe only occurrence of this term, Matthew 5:41, has reference to the Roman mile of 1,620 yards, about nine-tenths of a modern mile (1.4 kilometers).<\/p>\nCapacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\nAmounts of dry goods were oriented toward practical matters such as typical donkey loads, how much seed could be sown in a day, or how much seed would be needed to sow a certain size plot. As with the other types of measures, these then became standardized.<\/p>\n<h5>Cor\/Homer<\/h5>\nThe most common dry commodity measure and the equivalent of one donkey load. Estimates of its standard size vary greatly, ranging from 3.8 bushels to 7.5 bushels (133.9 to 264.3 liters). Other than the seven occurrences in Ezekiel 45:11-14, the term occurs only four times in the OT. Three of these contexts feature seed or barley (Lv 27:16; Is 5:10; Hos 3:2), while the fourth is in the context of Israelites gathering quail in the wilderness. A cor is used nine times and occurs with a variety of commodities, including oil, flour, wheat, and barley, in multiples all the way up to 20,000 (1 Kgs 5:11).<\/p>\n<h5>Lethek<\/h5>\nUnit occurring only in Hosea 3:2. The early versions of the Bible identified it as one-half of a cor, or homer.<\/p>\n<h5>Ephah<\/h5>\nThis is equal to one-tenth of a homer (Ez 45:11), or one-half of a bushel (17.6 liters). The term occurs dozens of times with all sorts of agricultural products. It seems to have been the unit most used in trading and selling. According to Zechariah 5:6-10, the ephah refers to a container that would hold an ephah of produce, much like the modern-day bushel basket.<\/p>\n<h5>Seah<\/h5>\nA fraction of the homer, which has a very wide range. The term measures flour, seed, barley, and grain, and is roughly one-third of an ephah. A bushel was about five seahs (1 Sm 25:18, nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<h5>Omer\/Issaron<\/h5>\nThe omer occurs only in the account of the collecting of manna by the Israelites (Ex 16:22). It represents a day’s ration of manna and is identified as one-tenth of an ephah (Ex 16:36). The issaron is a term that means a tenth. Its 25 occurrences are all in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers (mostly in Nm 28–29); it refers only to measures of fine flour.<\/p>\n<h5>Cab, Kab<\/h5>\nThis unit occurs only in 2 Kings 6:25. The estimate given by Josephus, one-eighteenth of an ephah (or about one-half of an omer), is usually accepted.<\/p>\nCapacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\nThe following dry measures are used in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Choinix<\/h5>\nOccurring only in Revelation 6:6 (see nlt<\/span> mg), the choinix is a little more than a quart (1.1 liters). In Greek literature it was considered the amount of one man’s daily allowance of corn.<\/p>\n<h5>Modius<\/h5>\nThis is the “bushel” under which one’s lamp should not be hid (Mt 5:15; Mk 4:21; Lk 11:33). It is actually equal to about a peck, 7.68 dry quarts (8.5 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Saton<\/h5>\nThis is the equivalent of the OT seah and can therefore also be approximated at about a peck. It is used only twice in the NT in parallel passages of the parable of the leaven, which is like the kingdom of God (Mt 13:33; Lk 13:21).<\/p>\nLiquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThree basic measures were used for liquids in the OT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\nThe base unit for the measurement of liquids. The biblical data (Ez 45:11-14) sets it as the liquid equivalent to the dry measure, the ephah. It is one-tenth of a homer. Archaeology has also been able to provide some data for this determination. Jars inscribed as “bath of the king” were found at Lachish and Tell en-Nasbeh, and jars marked “bath” were found at Tell Beit Mirsim. The jars are not complete, so their capacity must be calculated based on a reconstruction. Using this data, the bath was approximately 5.5 gallons (20.8 liters). This estimate would provide acceptable results when factored into the information given in 1 Kings 7:23-26, where the “molten sea” of Solomon’s temple is described as being 30 cubits in circumference, 10 cubits in diameter, 5 cubits deep, and capable of holding 2,000 baths of water.<\/p>\n<h5>Hin<\/h5>\nOne-sixth of a hin of water was considered a person’s minimum daily requirement (Ez 4:11). A hin is equal to one-sixth of a bath, approximately one gallon (3.8 liters). It is used for a measure of oil, wine, and water, but no context ever mentions more than one hin. Rather, fractions of a hin are used. Occurrences are limited to Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Ezekiel and are therefore most commonly attested in the context of sacrificial libations.<\/p>\n<h5>Log<\/h5>\nThis unit occurs only in Leviticus 14:10-24 and equals one-twelfth of a hin, so about .3 quart or .3 liter.<\/p>\nLiquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\nThe following liquid measures occur in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\nThis is used only once (Lk 16:6) and is the same as the OT bath.<\/p>\n<h5>Metretes<\/h5>\nThis is used only in John 2:6, where it describes the containers in which water was turned to wine. Josephus identifies it as equivalent to a Hebrew bath, but in Greek usage it was the equivalent of about ten gallons (37.9 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Sextarius\/Xestes<\/h5>\nA measure of capacity equal to about one and one-sixth pints (552 milliliters). In Mark 7:4 the word is translated “pitcher” (nlt<\/span>) or “pot” (kjv<\/span>, see mg).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WEIGHTS AND MEASURES<\/h3>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Introduction<\/p>\n• Weight Measures<\/p>\n• Linear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Linear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\n• Liquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Liquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\nIntroduction<\/p>\nUnits of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While this was a convenient system, it also suffered from a lack of standardization. Some arms were longer than others, and some donkeys could carry more than others. The history of weights and measures, therefore, becomes the story of seeking standards. This was not achieved in the OT but began to take place under Greek and Roman influences in NT times.<\/p>\nIn the OT the measures that were used are frequently attested to in Mesopotamian, Egyptian, and Canaanite literature as well. The Israelites did not have their own unique set of measurements. Yet while the terms are shared, it is not unusual to find a particular term having one value in Israel and a noticeably different value in one of the other cultures.<\/p>\nBy the time of the NT, other variables were added. The Israelites of this period were still using many of the measures that had been used and developed throughout the OT period. But added to that were the Greek and Roman systems of measurement. Sometimes these terms were adopted wholesale, while at other times Hebrew terms were adapted to Greco-Roman standards. On still other occasions, the Roman terms were apparently used when dealing with the government, whereas Hebrew terms were still used in everyday practice.<\/p>\nIn most of the kinds of measurement, the base unit (i.e., the one that all of the others are fractions or multiples of) is the one about which there is the most uncertainty. So the cubit (length), the shekel (weight), the homer (dry volume), and the bath (liquid volume) are all to some degree uncertain. This makes all of the other measures based on them equally uncertain.<\/p>\nWeight Measures<\/p>\nThe terms used for weights have benefited most from archaeological discoveries. Excavations provide stone weights that are occasionally inscribed with the unit they represent. When the stones are weighed, they frequently give a range of weights that have only a general consistency. However, comparing this data with that provided by the text has given the basis for fairly accurate determinations. The relative scale in any given location is more important than absolute values.<\/p>\n\nThere was standardization of weight measures, but precision was difficult to attain. The Israelite system is similar to that used by the Mesopotamians and the Canaanites. For most of the OT period, the weights system provided the monetary system. Minted coinage was the invention of the Persians. Up until that time, silver or gold or any other trading commodity had to be weighed out so that bartering or purchasing could take place. This made the weights system the core of the ancient economy. It also explains why the Scriptures speak so seriously against the use of false weights (Lv 19:36; Dt 25:13; Prv 16:11; 20:10, 23; Mi 6:11; Hos 12:7; Am 8:5).<\/p>\nStone weights were used on a set of balances for conducting business in the ancient marketplace. Scales or balances are mentioned half a dozen times in the OT, but none of those are in actual economic contexts (Jb 6:2; 31:6; Ps 62:9; Is 40:12; Ez 5:1; Dn 5:27). The scales used were generally of the beam-balance type with dishes on each end.<\/p>\n<h5>Talent<\/h5>\nAccording to Exodus 38:25-26 the talent must have been equal to 3,000 shekels. (A hundred talents would then have been equal to 300,000 shekels, and if that is added to the 1,175 shekels in verse 25, the total is 301,775, or half a shekel for each of the 603,550 men—as verse 26 states.) Excavated talents weigh from about 65 to 80 pounds (29.5 to 36.3 kilograms). In the OT the talent is used only for precious metals, usually silver or gold. According to 1 Kings 10:14, the annual tribute income of Solomon’s kingdom was 666 talents, which apparently was considered quite extravagant. David bequeathed 100,000 talents of gold and 1,000,000 talents of silver to Solomon for the building of the temple (1 Chr 22:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Mina<\/h5>\nIn the Canaanite material from Ugarit the mina equals 50 shekels, while in Babylon the mina equals 60 shekels. In Ezekiel 45:12, the mina is set at 60 shekels, but it is unclear whether this represents a change from previous standards.<\/p>\n<h5>Shekel<\/h5>\nThe shekel was the basic unit of weight. Besides the regular shekel, there was a “royal” shekel (2 Sm 14:26). Calculating by weights that have been excavated and found labeled as “beka” (one-half shekel), the shekel has been estimated to be about .4 ounce (11.4 grams).<\/p>\nThe shekel is used in Scripture almost exclusively in contexts dealing with monetary value. Whether silver, gold, barley, or flour, the shekel valuation assigns the commodity a relative value in the economy. Exceptions to this are Goliath’s armor and spear (1 Sm 17:5-7), which are described in terms of their shekel weight.<\/p>\n<h5>Pim<\/h5>\nThe only reference to this unit is in 1 Samuel 13:21, where it is the price charged to the Israelites by the Philistines for sharpening a plowshare. Excavated weights range from .25 to .3 ounce (7.1 to 8.5 grams), suggesting that the pim was two-thirds of a shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Beka<\/h5>\nSeven stones inscribed with this label range in weight from .2 to .23 ounce (5.7 to 6.5 grams). In Exodus 38:26 it is the amount levied on each individual for the census tax. There it is the equivalent of one-half shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Gerah<\/h5>\nEqual to one-twentieth of a shekel, or .02 ounce (.6 gram). The term is used five times (Ex 30:13; Lv 27:25; Nm 3:47; 18:16; Ez 45:12) and on each occasion is used to give a valuation to the shekel. Its use is strictly monetary in these contexts.<\/p>\n<h5>Litra<\/h5>\nThe NT uses the same weights that have already been identified in the OT usage, particularly the shekel, mina, and talent. There is one additional unit used: the litra, which is used in John 12:3 and 19:39 with regard to spices. In Greek literature one litra is approximately 12 ounces (327 grams).<\/p>\nLinear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\nMeasurements of length and depth generally were derived from a part of the body used to make the measurement. The basic unit was the cubit, and most others were related to it. Precise measurements of geographic distance are lacking in the OT and was most frequently stated in terms of the number of days it would take to arrive at a destination. A single day’s journey was mostly likely 20 to 25 miles (32.2 to 40.2 kilometers). A “pace” was equal to a “step”—about a yard (2 Sm 6:13).<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\nThe length from the tip of the forefinger to the elbow. There are both long and short cubits, which are used not only in Israel but in Mesopotamia and Egypt as well. Ezekiel 40:5 identifies the long cubit as being the equivalent of a cubit plus a handbreadth (about 20 to 21 inches, or 50.8 to 53.3 centimeters). The inscription found inside the Siloam tunnel built by Hezekiah (715–686 BC<\/span>) indicates that the tunnel is 1,200 cubits long. The actual length of the tunnel was determined to be 1,749 feet (533.1 meters). This would yield a cubit of 17.49 inches (44.4 centimeters). All things considered, 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters) is a good estimation of the length of the cubit in Israel. This would set the long cubit at approximately 20.5 inches (52.1 centimeters). The cubit was most frequently used to give the dimensions of buildings or objects (e.g., curtains, pillars, pieces of furniture, etc.). The largest structure measured in cubits was the ark that Noah built, which was 300 cubits long (Gn 6:15).<\/p>\n<h5>Span<\/h5>\nThe distance measured by the stretch of the hand from fingertip to fingertip, equal to one-half a cubit, or eight and three-quarters inches (22.2 centimeters). It is used only seven times in the OT, and four of those are to describe the dimensions of the high priest’s breastplate (Ex 28:15-16; 39:8-9).<\/p>\n<h5>Handbreadth<\/h5>\nThe width of the hand at the base, equal to one-sixth of a cubit, one-third of a span, or just under three inches (7.6 centimeters). The term is used only five times and gives the width of the rim around the table of showbread (Ex 25:25) and Solomon’s molten sea (1 Kgs 7:26).<\/p>\nLinear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\nIn the NT some of the units of length and depth represent Greco-Roman standards, while others are those used in the OT. Like the OT, the NT frequently uses imprecise designations for distance, such as a stone’s throw or a day’s journey. There are, however, a few occurrences of precise terms borrowed from Roman culture.<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\nFor the Romans, the cubit was set at one and a half times their standard foot of 11.66 inches, equaling 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters), just as the OT cubit.<\/p>\n<h5>Fathom<\/h5>\nThe distance between the fingertips of the left and right hand when the arms were outstretched. It is used only in Acts 27:28 and is considered to be about six feet (1.8 meters).<\/p>\n<h5>Furlong\/Stadium<\/h5>\nThe length of the ancient Greek racecourse, equal to one-eighth of a Roman mile, or a little over 200 yards (182.9 meters). It is usually used to give approximate distance, but in Revelation 21:16 it is used to give the dimensions of the New Jerusalem and is measured with a measuring rod.<\/p>\n<h5>Mile<\/h5>\nThe only occurrence of this term, Matthew 5:41, has reference to the Roman mile of 1,620 yards, about nine-tenths of a modern mile (1.4 kilometers).<\/p>\nCapacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\nAmounts of dry goods were oriented toward practical matters such as typical donkey loads, how much seed could be sown in a day, or how much seed would be needed to sow a certain size plot. As with the other types of measures, these then became standardized.<\/p>\n<h5>Cor\/Homer<\/h5>\nThe most common dry commodity measure and the equivalent of one donkey load. Estimates of its standard size vary greatly, ranging from 3.8 bushels to 7.5 bushels (133.9 to 264.3 liters). Other than the seven occurrences in Ezekiel 45:11-14, the term occurs only four times in the OT. Three of these contexts feature seed or barley (Lv 27:16; Is 5:10; Hos 3:2), while the fourth is in the context of Israelites gathering quail in the wilderness. A cor is used nine times and occurs with a variety of commodities, including oil, flour, wheat, and barley, in multiples all the way up to 20,000 (1 Kgs 5:11).<\/p>\n<h5>Lethek<\/h5>\nUnit occurring only in Hosea 3:2. The early versions of the Bible identified it as one-half of a cor, or homer.<\/p>\n<h5>Ephah<\/h5>\nThis is equal to one-tenth of a homer (Ez 45:11), or one-half of a bushel (17.6 liters). The term occurs dozens of times with all sorts of agricultural products. It seems to have been the unit most used in trading and selling. According to Zechariah 5:6-10, the ephah refers to a container that would hold an ephah of produce, much like the modern-day bushel basket.<\/p>\n<h5>Seah<\/h5>\nA fraction of the homer, which has a very wide range. The term measures flour, seed, barley, and grain, and is roughly one-third of an ephah. A bushel was about five seahs (1 Sm 25:18, nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<h5>Omer\/Issaron<\/h5>\nThe omer occurs only in the account of the collecting of manna by the Israelites (Ex 16:22). It represents a day’s ration of manna and is identified as one-tenth of an ephah (Ex 16:36). The issaron is a term that means a tenth. Its 25 occurrences are all in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers (mostly in Nm 28–29); it refers only to measures of fine flour.<\/p>\n<h5>Cab, Kab<\/h5>\nThis unit occurs only in 2 Kings 6:25. The estimate given by Josephus, one-eighteenth of an ephah (or about one-half of an omer), is usually accepted.<\/p>\nCapacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\nThe following dry measures are used in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Choinix<\/h5>\nOccurring only in Revelation 6:6 (see nlt<\/span> mg), the choinix is a little more than a quart (1.1 liters). In Greek literature it was considered the amount of one man’s daily allowance of corn.<\/p>\n<h5>Modius<\/h5>\nThis is the “bushel” under which one’s lamp should not be hid (Mt 5:15; Mk 4:21; Lk 11:33). It is actually equal to about a peck, 7.68 dry quarts (8.5 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Saton<\/h5>\nThis is the equivalent of the OT seah and can therefore also be approximated at about a peck. It is used only twice in the NT in parallel passages of the parable of the leaven, which is like the kingdom of God (Mt 13:33; Lk 13:21).<\/p>\nLiquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThree basic measures were used for liquids in the OT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\nThe base unit for the measurement of liquids. The biblical data (Ez 45:11-14) sets it as the liquid equivalent to the dry measure, the ephah. It is one-tenth of a homer. Archaeology has also been able to provide some data for this determination. Jars inscribed as “bath of the king” were found at Lachish and Tell en-Nasbeh, and jars marked “bath” were found at Tell Beit Mirsim. The jars are not complete, so their capacity must be calculated based on a reconstruction. Using this data, the bath was approximately 5.5 gallons (20.8 liters). This estimate would provide acceptable results when factored into the information given in 1 Kings 7:23-26, where the “molten sea” of Solomon’s temple is described as being 30 cubits in circumference, 10 cubits in diameter, 5 cubits deep, and capable of holding 2,000 baths of water.<\/p>\n<h5>Hin<\/h5>\nOne-sixth of a hin of water was considered a person’s minimum daily requirement (Ez 4:11). A hin is equal to one-sixth of a bath, approximately one gallon (3.8 liters). It is used for a measure of oil, wine, and water, but no context ever mentions more than one hin. Rather, fractions of a hin are used. Occurrences are limited to Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Ezekiel and are therefore most commonly attested in the context of sacrificial libations.<\/p>\n<h5>Log<\/h5>\nThis unit occurs only in Leviticus 14:10-24 and equals one-twelfth of a hin, so about .3 quart or .3 liter.<\/p>\nLiquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\nThe following liquid measures occur in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\nThis is used only once (Lk 16:6) and is the same as the OT bath.<\/p>\n<h5>Metretes<\/h5>\nThis is used only in John 2:6, where it describes the containers in which water was turned to wine. Josephus identifies it as equivalent to a Hebrew bath, but in Greek usage it was the equivalent of about ten gallons (37.9 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Sextarius\/Xestes<\/h5>\nA measure of capacity equal to about one and one-sixth pints (552 milliliters). In Mark 7:4 the word is translated “pitcher” (nlt<\/span>) or “pot” (kjv<\/span>, see mg).<\/p>","summary_ro":"WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Preview • Introduction • Weight Measures • Linear Measures in the Old Testament • Linear Measures in the New Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament • Liquid Measures in the Old Testament • Liquid Measures in the New Testament Introduction Units of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While thi...","summary_en":"WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Preview • Introduction • Weight Measures • Linear Measures in the Old Testament • Linear Measures in the New Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament • Liquid Measures in the Old Testament • Liquid Measures in the New Testament Introduction Units of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While thi...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":24266,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Maneh*","title_en":"Maneh*","content_ro":"<h3>MANEH*<\/h3>\nKJV rendering of mina, a weight in Ezekiel 45:12. See<\/em> Weights and Measures.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MANEH*<\/h3>\nKJV rendering of mina, a weight in Ezekiel 45:12. See<\/em> Weights and Measures.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MANEH* KJV rendering of mina, a weight in Ezekiel 45:12. See Weights and Measures.","summary_en":"MANEH* KJV rendering of mina, a weight in Ezekiel 45:12. See Weights and Measures.","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38281,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Weights and Measures","title_en":"Weights and Measures","content_ro":"<h3>WEIGHTS AND MEASURES<\/h3>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Introduction<\/p>\n• Weight Measures<\/p>\n• Linear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Linear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\n• Liquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Liquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\nIntroduction<\/p>\nUnits of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While this was a convenient system, it also suffered from a lack of standardization. Some arms were longer than others, and some donkeys could carry more than others. The history of weights and measures, therefore, becomes the story of seeking standards. This was not achieved in the OT but began to take place under Greek and Roman influences in NT times.<\/p>\nIn the OT the measures that were used are frequently attested to in Mesopotamian, Egyptian, and Canaanite literature as well. The Israelites did not have their own unique set of measurements. Yet while the terms are shared, it is not unusual to find a particular term having one value in Israel and a noticeably different value in one of the other cultures.<\/p>\nBy the time of the NT, other variables were added. The Israelites of this period were still using many of the measures that had been used and developed throughout the OT period. But added to that were the Greek and Roman systems of measurement. Sometimes these terms were adopted wholesale, while at other times Hebrew terms were adapted to Greco-Roman standards. On still other occasions, the Roman terms were apparently used when dealing with the government, whereas Hebrew terms were still used in everyday practice.<\/p>\nIn most of the kinds of measurement, the base unit (i.e., the one that all of the others are fractions or multiples of) is the one about which there is the most uncertainty. So the cubit (length), the shekel (weight), the homer (dry volume), and the bath (liquid volume) are all to some degree uncertain. This makes all of the other measures based on them equally uncertain.<\/p>\nWeight Measures<\/p>\nThe terms used for weights have benefited most from archaeological discoveries. Excavations provide stone weights that are occasionally inscribed with the unit they represent. When the stones are weighed, they frequently give a range of weights that have only a general consistency. However, comparing this data with that provided by the text has given the basis for fairly accurate determinations. The relative scale in any given location is more important than absolute values.<\/p>\n\nThere was standardization of weight measures, but precision was difficult to attain. The Israelite system is similar to that used by the Mesopotamians and the Canaanites. For most of the OT period, the weights system provided the monetary system. Minted coinage was the invention of the Persians. Up until that time, silver or gold or any other trading commodity had to be weighed out so that bartering or purchasing could take place. This made the weights system the core of the ancient economy. It also explains why the Scriptures speak so seriously against the use of false weights (Lv 19:36; Dt 25:13; Prv 16:11; 20:10, 23; Mi 6:11; Hos 12:7; Am 8:5).<\/p>\nStone weights were used on a set of balances for conducting business in the ancient marketplace. Scales or balances are mentioned half a dozen times in the OT, but none of those are in actual economic contexts (Jb 6:2; 31:6; Ps 62:9; Is 40:12; Ez 5:1; Dn 5:27). The scales used were generally of the beam-balance type with dishes on each end.<\/p>\n<h5>Talent<\/h5>\nAccording to Exodus 38:25-26 the talent must have been equal to 3,000 shekels. (A hundred talents would then have been equal to 300,000 shekels, and if that is added to the 1,175 shekels in verse 25, the total is 301,775, or half a shekel for each of the 603,550 men—as verse 26 states.) Excavated talents weigh from about 65 to 80 pounds (29.5 to 36.3 kilograms). In the OT the talent is used only for precious metals, usually silver or gold. According to 1 Kings 10:14, the annual tribute income of Solomon’s kingdom was 666 talents, which apparently was considered quite extravagant. David bequeathed 100,000 talents of gold and 1,000,000 talents of silver to Solomon for the building of the temple (1 Chr 22:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Mina<\/h5>\nIn the Canaanite material from Ugarit the mina equals 50 shekels, while in Babylon the mina equals 60 shekels. In Ezekiel 45:12, the mina is set at 60 shekels, but it is unclear whether this represents a change from previous standards.<\/p>\n<h5>Shekel<\/h5>\nThe shekel was the basic unit of weight. Besides the regular shekel, there was a “royal” shekel (2 Sm 14:26). Calculating by weights that have been excavated and found labeled as “beka” (one-half shekel), the shekel has been estimated to be about .4 ounce (11.4 grams).<\/p>\nThe shekel is used in Scripture almost exclusively in contexts dealing with monetary value. Whether silver, gold, barley, or flour, the shekel valuation assigns the commodity a relative value in the economy. Exceptions to this are Goliath’s armor and spear (1 Sm 17:5-7), which are described in terms of their shekel weight.<\/p>\n<h5>Pim<\/h5>\nThe only reference to this unit is in 1 Samuel 13:21, where it is the price charged to the Israelites by the Philistines for sharpening a plowshare. Excavated weights range from .25 to .3 ounce (7.1 to 8.5 grams), suggesting that the pim was two-thirds of a shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Beka<\/h5>\nSeven stones inscribed with this label range in weight from .2 to .23 ounce (5.7 to 6.5 grams). In Exodus 38:26 it is the amount levied on each individual for the census tax. There it is the equivalent of one-half shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Gerah<\/h5>\nEqual to one-twentieth of a shekel, or .02 ounce (.6 gram). The term is used five times (Ex 30:13; Lv 27:25; Nm 3:47; 18:16; Ez 45:12) and on each occasion is used to give a valuation to the shekel. Its use is strictly monetary in these contexts.<\/p>\n<h5>Litra<\/h5>\nThe NT uses the same weights that have already been identified in the OT usage, particularly the shekel, mina, and talent. There is one additional unit used: the litra, which is used in John 12:3 and 19:39 with regard to spices. In Greek literature one litra is approximately 12 ounces (327 grams).<\/p>\nLinear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\nMeasurements of length and depth generally were derived from a part of the body used to make the measurement. The basic unit was the cubit, and most others were related to it. Precise measurements of geographic distance are lacking in the OT and was most frequently stated in terms of the number of days it would take to arrive at a destination. A single day’s journey was mostly likely 20 to 25 miles (32.2 to 40.2 kilometers). A “pace” was equal to a “step”—about a yard (2 Sm 6:13).<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\nThe length from the tip of the forefinger to the elbow. There are both long and short cubits, which are used not only in Israel but in Mesopotamia and Egypt as well. Ezekiel 40:5 identifies the long cubit as being the equivalent of a cubit plus a handbreadth (about 20 to 21 inches, or 50.8 to 53.3 centimeters). The inscription found inside the Siloam tunnel built by Hezekiah (715–686 BC<\/span>) indicates that the tunnel is 1,200 cubits long. The actual length of the tunnel was determined to be 1,749 feet (533.1 meters). This would yield a cubit of 17.49 inches (44.4 centimeters). All things considered, 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters) is a good estimation of the length of the cubit in Israel. This would set the long cubit at approximately 20.5 inches (52.1 centimeters). The cubit was most frequently used to give the dimensions of buildings or objects (e.g., curtains, pillars, pieces of furniture, etc.). The largest structure measured in cubits was the ark that Noah built, which was 300 cubits long (Gn 6:15).<\/p>\n<h5>Span<\/h5>\nThe distance measured by the stretch of the hand from fingertip to fingertip, equal to one-half a cubit, or eight and three-quarters inches (22.2 centimeters). It is used only seven times in the OT, and four of those are to describe the dimensions of the high priest’s breastplate (Ex 28:15-16; 39:8-9).<\/p>\n<h5>Handbreadth<\/h5>\nThe width of the hand at the base, equal to one-sixth of a cubit, one-third of a span, or just under three inches (7.6 centimeters). The term is used only five times and gives the width of the rim around the table of showbread (Ex 25:25) and Solomon’s molten sea (1 Kgs 7:26).<\/p>\nLinear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\nIn the NT some of the units of length and depth represent Greco-Roman standards, while others are those used in the OT. Like the OT, the NT frequently uses imprecise designations for distance, such as a stone’s throw or a day’s journey. There are, however, a few occurrences of precise terms borrowed from Roman culture.<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\nFor the Romans, the cubit was set at one and a half times their standard foot of 11.66 inches, equaling 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters), just as the OT cubit.<\/p>\n<h5>Fathom<\/h5>\nThe distance between the fingertips of the left and right hand when the arms were outstretched. It is used only in Acts 27:28 and is considered to be about six feet (1.8 meters).<\/p>\n<h5>Furlong\/Stadium<\/h5>\nThe length of the ancient Greek racecourse, equal to one-eighth of a Roman mile, or a little over 200 yards (182.9 meters). It is usually used to give approximate distance, but in Revelation 21:16 it is used to give the dimensions of the New Jerusalem and is measured with a measuring rod.<\/p>\n<h5>Mile<\/h5>\nThe only occurrence of this term, Matthew 5:41, has reference to the Roman mile of 1,620 yards, about nine-tenths of a modern mile (1.4 kilometers).<\/p>\nCapacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\nAmounts of dry goods were oriented toward practical matters such as typical donkey loads, how much seed could be sown in a day, or how much seed would be needed to sow a certain size plot. As with the other types of measures, these then became standardized.<\/p>\n<h5>Cor\/Homer<\/h5>\nThe most common dry commodity measure and the equivalent of one donkey load. Estimates of its standard size vary greatly, ranging from 3.8 bushels to 7.5 bushels (133.9 to 264.3 liters). Other than the seven occurrences in Ezekiel 45:11-14, the term occurs only four times in the OT. Three of these contexts feature seed or barley (Lv 27:16; Is 5:10; Hos 3:2), while the fourth is in the context of Israelites gathering quail in the wilderness. A cor is used nine times and occurs with a variety of commodities, including oil, flour, wheat, and barley, in multiples all the way up to 20,000 (1 Kgs 5:11).<\/p>\n<h5>Lethek<\/h5>\nUnit occurring only in Hosea 3:2. The early versions of the Bible identified it as one-half of a cor, or homer.<\/p>\n<h5>Ephah<\/h5>\nThis is equal to one-tenth of a homer (Ez 45:11), or one-half of a bushel (17.6 liters). The term occurs dozens of times with all sorts of agricultural products. It seems to have been the unit most used in trading and selling. According to Zechariah 5:6-10, the ephah refers to a container that would hold an ephah of produce, much like the modern-day bushel basket.<\/p>\n<h5>Seah<\/h5>\nA fraction of the homer, which has a very wide range. The term measures flour, seed, barley, and grain, and is roughly one-third of an ephah. A bushel was about five seahs (1 Sm 25:18, nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<h5>Omer\/Issaron<\/h5>\nThe omer occurs only in the account of the collecting of manna by the Israelites (Ex 16:22). It represents a day’s ration of manna and is identified as one-tenth of an ephah (Ex 16:36). The issaron is a term that means a tenth. Its 25 occurrences are all in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers (mostly in Nm 28–29); it refers only to measures of fine flour.<\/p>\n<h5>Cab, Kab<\/h5>\nThis unit occurs only in 2 Kings 6:25. The estimate given by Josephus, one-eighteenth of an ephah (or about one-half of an omer), is usually accepted.<\/p>\nCapacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\nThe following dry measures are used in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Choinix<\/h5>\nOccurring only in Revelation 6:6 (see nlt<\/span> mg), the choinix is a little more than a quart (1.1 liters). In Greek literature it was considered the amount of one man’s daily allowance of corn.<\/p>\n<h5>Modius<\/h5>\nThis is the “bushel” under which one’s lamp should not be hid (Mt 5:15; Mk 4:21; Lk 11:33). It is actually equal to about a peck, 7.68 dry quarts (8.5 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Saton<\/h5>\nThis is the equivalent of the OT seah and can therefore also be approximated at about a peck. It is used only twice in the NT in parallel passages of the parable of the leaven, which is like the kingdom of God (Mt 13:33; Lk 13:21).<\/p>\nLiquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThree basic measures were used for liquids in the OT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\nThe base unit for the measurement of liquids. The biblical data (Ez 45:11-14) sets it as the liquid equivalent to the dry measure, the ephah. It is one-tenth of a homer. Archaeology has also been able to provide some data for this determination. Jars inscribed as “bath of the king” were found at Lachish and Tell en-Nasbeh, and jars marked “bath” were found at Tell Beit Mirsim. The jars are not complete, so their capacity must be calculated based on a reconstruction. Using this data, the bath was approximately 5.5 gallons (20.8 liters). This estimate would provide acceptable results when factored into the information given in 1 Kings 7:23-26, where the “molten sea” of Solomon’s temple is described as being 30 cubits in circumference, 10 cubits in diameter, 5 cubits deep, and capable of holding 2,000 baths of water.<\/p>\n<h5>Hin<\/h5>\nOne-sixth of a hin of water was considered a person’s minimum daily requirement (Ez 4:11). A hin is equal to one-sixth of a bath, approximately one gallon (3.8 liters). It is used for a measure of oil, wine, and water, but no context ever mentions more than one hin. Rather, fractions of a hin are used. Occurrences are limited to Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Ezekiel and are therefore most commonly attested in the context of sacrificial libations.<\/p>\n<h5>Log<\/h5>\nThis unit occurs only in Leviticus 14:10-24 and equals one-twelfth of a hin, so about .3 quart or .3 liter.<\/p>\nLiquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\nThe following liquid measures occur in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\nThis is used only once (Lk 16:6) and is the same as the OT bath.<\/p>\n<h5>Metretes<\/h5>\nThis is used only in John 2:6, where it describes the containers in which water was turned to wine. Josephus identifies it as equivalent to a Hebrew bath, but in Greek usage it was the equivalent of about ten gallons (37.9 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Sextarius\/Xestes<\/h5>\nA measure of capacity equal to about one and one-sixth pints (552 milliliters). In Mark 7:4 the word is translated “pitcher” (nlt<\/span>) or “pot” (kjv<\/span>, see mg).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WEIGHTS AND MEASURES<\/h3>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Introduction<\/p>\n• Weight Measures<\/p>\n• Linear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Linear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\n• Liquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Liquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\nIntroduction<\/p>\nUnits of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While this was a convenient system, it also suffered from a lack of standardization. Some arms were longer than others, and some donkeys could carry more than others. The history of weights and measures, therefore, becomes the story of seeking standards. This was not achieved in the OT but began to take place under Greek and Roman influences in NT times.<\/p>\nIn the OT the measures that were used are frequently attested to in Mesopotamian, Egyptian, and Canaanite literature as well. The Israelites did not have their own unique set of measurements. Yet while the terms are shared, it is not unusual to find a particular term having one value in Israel and a noticeably different value in one of the other cultures.<\/p>\nBy the time of the NT, other variables were added. The Israelites of this period were still using many of the measures that had been used and developed throughout the OT period. But added to that were the Greek and Roman systems of measurement. Sometimes these terms were adopted wholesale, while at other times Hebrew terms were adapted to Greco-Roman standards. On still other occasions, the Roman terms were apparently used when dealing with the government, whereas Hebrew terms were still used in everyday practice.<\/p>\nIn most of the kinds of measurement, the base unit (i.e., the one that all of the others are fractions or multiples of) is the one about which there is the most uncertainty. So the cubit (length), the shekel (weight), the homer (dry volume), and the bath (liquid volume) are all to some degree uncertain. This makes all of the other measures based on them equally uncertain.<\/p>\nWeight Measures<\/p>\nThe terms used for weights have benefited most from archaeological discoveries. Excavations provide stone weights that are occasionally inscribed with the unit they represent. When the stones are weighed, they frequently give a range of weights that have only a general consistency. However, comparing this data with that provided by the text has given the basis for fairly accurate determinations. The relative scale in any given location is more important than absolute values.<\/p>\n\nThere was standardization of weight measures, but precision was difficult to attain. The Israelite system is similar to that used by the Mesopotamians and the Canaanites. For most of the OT period, the weights system provided the monetary system. Minted coinage was the invention of the Persians. Up until that time, silver or gold or any other trading commodity had to be weighed out so that bartering or purchasing could take place. This made the weights system the core of the ancient economy. It also explains why the Scriptures speak so seriously against the use of false weights (Lv 19:36; Dt 25:13; Prv 16:11; 20:10, 23; Mi 6:11; Hos 12:7; Am 8:5).<\/p>\nStone weights were used on a set of balances for conducting business in the ancient marketplace. Scales or balances are mentioned half a dozen times in the OT, but none of those are in actual economic contexts (Jb 6:2; 31:6; Ps 62:9; Is 40:12; Ez 5:1; Dn 5:27). The scales used were generally of the beam-balance type with dishes on each end.<\/p>\n<h5>Talent<\/h5>\nAccording to Exodus 38:25-26 the talent must have been equal to 3,000 shekels. (A hundred talents would then have been equal to 300,000 shekels, and if that is added to the 1,175 shekels in verse 25, the total is 301,775, or half a shekel for each of the 603,550 men—as verse 26 states.) Excavated talents weigh from about 65 to 80 pounds (29.5 to 36.3 kilograms). In the OT the talent is used only for precious metals, usually silver or gold. According to 1 Kings 10:14, the annual tribute income of Solomon’s kingdom was 666 talents, which apparently was considered quite extravagant. David bequeathed 100,000 talents of gold and 1,000,000 talents of silver to Solomon for the building of the temple (1 Chr 22:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Mina<\/h5>\nIn the Canaanite material from Ugarit the mina equals 50 shekels, while in Babylon the mina equals 60 shekels. In Ezekiel 45:12, the mina is set at 60 shekels, but it is unclear whether this represents a change from previous standards.<\/p>\n<h5>Shekel<\/h5>\nThe shekel was the basic unit of weight. Besides the regular shekel, there was a “royal” shekel (2 Sm 14:26). Calculating by weights that have been excavated and found labeled as “beka” (one-half shekel), the shekel has been estimated to be about .4 ounce (11.4 grams).<\/p>\nThe shekel is used in Scripture almost exclusively in contexts dealing with monetary value. Whether silver, gold, barley, or flour, the shekel valuation assigns the commodity a relative value in the economy. Exceptions to this are Goliath’s armor and spear (1 Sm 17:5-7), which are described in terms of their shekel weight.<\/p>\n<h5>Pim<\/h5>\nThe only reference to this unit is in 1 Samuel 13:21, where it is the price charged to the Israelites by the Philistines for sharpening a plowshare. Excavated weights range from .25 to .3 ounce (7.1 to 8.5 grams), suggesting that the pim was two-thirds of a shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Beka<\/h5>\nSeven stones inscribed with this label range in weight from .2 to .23 ounce (5.7 to 6.5 grams). In Exodus 38:26 it is the amount levied on each individual for the census tax. There it is the equivalent of one-half shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Gerah<\/h5>\nEqual to one-twentieth of a shekel, or .02 ounce (.6 gram). The term is used five times (Ex 30:13; Lv 27:25; Nm 3:47; 18:16; Ez 45:12) and on each occasion is used to give a valuation to the shekel. Its use is strictly monetary in these contexts.<\/p>\n<h5>Litra<\/h5>\nThe NT uses the same weights that have already been identified in the OT usage, particularly the shekel, mina, and talent. There is one additional unit used: the litra, which is used in John 12:3 and 19:39 with regard to spices. In Greek literature one litra is approximately 12 ounces (327 grams).<\/p>\nLinear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\nMeasurements of length and depth generally were derived from a part of the body used to make the measurement. The basic unit was the cubit, and most others were related to it. Precise measurements of geographic distance are lacking in the OT and was most frequently stated in terms of the number of days it would take to arrive at a destination. A single day’s journey was mostly likely 20 to 25 miles (32.2 to 40.2 kilometers). A “pace” was equal to a “step”—about a yard (2 Sm 6:13).<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\nThe length from the tip of the forefinger to the elbow. There are both long and short cubits, which are used not only in Israel but in Mesopotamia and Egypt as well. Ezekiel 40:5 identifies the long cubit as being the equivalent of a cubit plus a handbreadth (about 20 to 21 inches, or 50.8 to 53.3 centimeters). The inscription found inside the Siloam tunnel built by Hezekiah (715–686 BC<\/span>) indicates that the tunnel is 1,200 cubits long. The actual length of the tunnel was determined to be 1,749 feet (533.1 meters). This would yield a cubit of 17.49 inches (44.4 centimeters). All things considered, 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters) is a good estimation of the length of the cubit in Israel. This would set the long cubit at approximately 20.5 inches (52.1 centimeters). The cubit was most frequently used to give the dimensions of buildings or objects (e.g., curtains, pillars, pieces of furniture, etc.). The largest structure measured in cubits was the ark that Noah built, which was 300 cubits long (Gn 6:15).<\/p>\n<h5>Span<\/h5>\nThe distance measured by the stretch of the hand from fingertip to fingertip, equal to one-half a cubit, or eight and three-quarters inches (22.2 centimeters). It is used only seven times in the OT, and four of those are to describe the dimensions of the high priest’s breastplate (Ex 28:15-16; 39:8-9).<\/p>\n<h5>Handbreadth<\/h5>\nThe width of the hand at the base, equal to one-sixth of a cubit, one-third of a span, or just under three inches (7.6 centimeters). The term is used only five times and gives the width of the rim around the table of showbread (Ex 25:25) and Solomon’s molten sea (1 Kgs 7:26).<\/p>\nLinear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\nIn the NT some of the units of length and depth represent Greco-Roman standards, while others are those used in the OT. Like the OT, the NT frequently uses imprecise designations for distance, such as a stone’s throw or a day’s journey. There are, however, a few occurrences of precise terms borrowed from Roman culture.<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\nFor the Romans, the cubit was set at one and a half times their standard foot of 11.66 inches, equaling 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters), just as the OT cubit.<\/p>\n<h5>Fathom<\/h5>\nThe distance between the fingertips of the left and right hand when the arms were outstretched. It is used only in Acts 27:28 and is considered to be about six feet (1.8 meters).<\/p>\n<h5>Furlong\/Stadium<\/h5>\nThe length of the ancient Greek racecourse, equal to one-eighth of a Roman mile, or a little over 200 yards (182.9 meters). It is usually used to give approximate distance, but in Revelation 21:16 it is used to give the dimensions of the New Jerusalem and is measured with a measuring rod.<\/p>\n<h5>Mile<\/h5>\nThe only occurrence of this term, Matthew 5:41, has reference to the Roman mile of 1,620 yards, about nine-tenths of a modern mile (1.4 kilometers).<\/p>\nCapacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\nAmounts of dry goods were oriented toward practical matters such as typical donkey loads, how much seed could be sown in a day, or how much seed would be needed to sow a certain size plot. As with the other types of measures, these then became standardized.<\/p>\n<h5>Cor\/Homer<\/h5>\nThe most common dry commodity measure and the equivalent of one donkey load. Estimates of its standard size vary greatly, ranging from 3.8 bushels to 7.5 bushels (133.9 to 264.3 liters). Other than the seven occurrences in Ezekiel 45:11-14, the term occurs only four times in the OT. Three of these contexts feature seed or barley (Lv 27:16; Is 5:10; Hos 3:2), while the fourth is in the context of Israelites gathering quail in the wilderness. A cor is used nine times and occurs with a variety of commodities, including oil, flour, wheat, and barley, in multiples all the way up to 20,000 (1 Kgs 5:11).<\/p>\n<h5>Lethek<\/h5>\nUnit occurring only in Hosea 3:2. The early versions of the Bible identified it as one-half of a cor, or homer.<\/p>\n<h5>Ephah<\/h5>\nThis is equal to one-tenth of a homer (Ez 45:11), or one-half of a bushel (17.6 liters). The term occurs dozens of times with all sorts of agricultural products. It seems to have been the unit most used in trading and selling. According to Zechariah 5:6-10, the ephah refers to a container that would hold an ephah of produce, much like the modern-day bushel basket.<\/p>\n<h5>Seah<\/h5>\nA fraction of the homer, which has a very wide range. The term measures flour, seed, barley, and grain, and is roughly one-third of an ephah. A bushel was about five seahs (1 Sm 25:18, nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<h5>Omer\/Issaron<\/h5>\nThe omer occurs only in the account of the collecting of manna by the Israelites (Ex 16:22). It represents a day’s ration of manna and is identified as one-tenth of an ephah (Ex 16:36). The issaron is a term that means a tenth. Its 25 occurrences are all in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers (mostly in Nm 28–29); it refers only to measures of fine flour.<\/p>\n<h5>Cab, Kab<\/h5>\nThis unit occurs only in 2 Kings 6:25. The estimate given by Josephus, one-eighteenth of an ephah (or about one-half of an omer), is usually accepted.<\/p>\nCapacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\nThe following dry measures are used in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Choinix<\/h5>\nOccurring only in Revelation 6:6 (see nlt<\/span> mg), the choinix is a little more than a quart (1.1 liters). In Greek literature it was considered the amount of one man’s daily allowance of corn.<\/p>\n<h5>Modius<\/h5>\nThis is the “bushel” under which one’s lamp should not be hid (Mt 5:15; Mk 4:21; Lk 11:33). It is actually equal to about a peck, 7.68 dry quarts (8.5 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Saton<\/h5>\nThis is the equivalent of the OT seah and can therefore also be approximated at about a peck. It is used only twice in the NT in parallel passages of the parable of the leaven, which is like the kingdom of God (Mt 13:33; Lk 13:21).<\/p>\nLiquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThree basic measures were used for liquids in the OT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\nThe base unit for the measurement of liquids. The biblical data (Ez 45:11-14) sets it as the liquid equivalent to the dry measure, the ephah. It is one-tenth of a homer. Archaeology has also been able to provide some data for this determination. Jars inscribed as “bath of the king” were found at Lachish and Tell en-Nasbeh, and jars marked “bath” were found at Tell Beit Mirsim. The jars are not complete, so their capacity must be calculated based on a reconstruction. Using this data, the bath was approximately 5.5 gallons (20.8 liters). This estimate would provide acceptable results when factored into the information given in 1 Kings 7:23-26, where the “molten sea” of Solomon’s temple is described as being 30 cubits in circumference, 10 cubits in diameter, 5 cubits deep, and capable of holding 2,000 baths of water.<\/p>\n<h5>Hin<\/h5>\nOne-sixth of a hin of water was considered a person’s minimum daily requirement (Ez 4:11). A hin is equal to one-sixth of a bath, approximately one gallon (3.8 liters). It is used for a measure of oil, wine, and water, but no context ever mentions more than one hin. Rather, fractions of a hin are used. Occurrences are limited to Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Ezekiel and are therefore most commonly attested in the context of sacrificial libations.<\/p>\n<h5>Log<\/h5>\nThis unit occurs only in Leviticus 14:10-24 and equals one-twelfth of a hin, so about .3 quart or .3 liter.<\/p>\nLiquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\nThe following liquid measures occur in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\nThis is used only once (Lk 16:6) and is the same as the OT bath.<\/p>\n<h5>Metretes<\/h5>\nThis is used only in John 2:6, where it describes the containers in which water was turned to wine. Josephus identifies it as equivalent to a Hebrew bath, but in Greek usage it was the equivalent of about ten gallons (37.9 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Sextarius\/Xestes<\/h5>\nA measure of capacity equal to about one and one-sixth pints (552 milliliters). In Mark 7:4 the word is translated “pitcher” (nlt<\/span>) or “pot” (kjv<\/span>, see mg).<\/p>","summary_ro":"WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Preview • Introduction • Weight Measures • Linear Measures in the Old Testament • Linear Measures in the New Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament • Liquid Measures in the Old Testament • Liquid Measures in the New Testament Introduction Units of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While thi...","summary_en":"WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Preview • Introduction • Weight Measures • Linear Measures in the Old Testament • Linear Measures in the New Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament • Liquid Measures in the Old Testament • Liquid Measures in the New Testament Introduction Units of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While thi...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":26190,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Money","title_en":"Money","content_ro":"<h3>MONEY<\/h3>\nMedium of exchange, measurement of value, means of payment.<\/p>\nMoney was developed as a convenient medium of exchange to supplement and later to replace bartering, although the two systems operated concurrently for many centuries. From the patriarchal period to the present day, wealth has been measured in terms of goods and precious metals, particularly gold and silver, which remain universally acceptable mediums of exchange. Genesis 13:2 describes Abraham as “very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold.”<\/p>\nWealth in a nomadic or seminomadic society was frequently measured by the number of cattle a person possessed, and because of this, cattle were a readily acceptable and easily valued, if rather large, medium of exchange. The degree to which cattle were commonly recognized as the standard for value, wealth, and exchange is reflected in the Latin form for money, pecunia,<\/em> which is derived directly from pecus,<\/em> meaning “cattle.” For religious purposes, taxes or donations paid in cattle were most acceptable, and this not only increased the general recognition for this medium but also made the temple a repository for large herds of cattle, as well as smaller animals and produce, which, if they could not be used directly in the temple rituals, could be bartered for whatever commodities were required. Perishable foods were less popular for purposes of exchange than animals such as sheep and asses, although timber, wine, and honey were regularly used as a form of currency (1 Sm 8:15; 2 Kgs 3:4; Ez 45:13-16). Both public and private taxes, tribute, and debts of all kinds were settled by this means. Solomon paid Hiram, king of Tyre, in wheat and olive oil for his assistance in the construction of the temple (1 Kgs 5:11), and in the eighth century BC<\/span> taxes were commonly paid in jars of wine or olive oil. Tribute in the form of sheep and wool is recorded in 2 Kings 3:4.<\/p>\nAll the means of exchange mentioned represented goods that could be measured or counted, and attempts were made to establish a standard rate of exchange for them in relation to each other.<\/p>\nSilver was the precious metal most readily available in the ancient Near East and was therefore the one most frequently mentioned in connection with purchases by weight, and at a later period by coin. The first recorded instance in the Bible of silver being used as a medium of exchange occurs in Genesis 20:14-16, where Abraham received a payment of 1,000 shekels by weight of silver, as well as animals and slaves. Abraham also purchased the field and cave of Machpelah for 400 shekels of silver (Gn 23:15-16), which according to the custom of the day had to be weighed out in front of the vendor and checked by witnesses (cf. Jer 32:9-10).<\/p>\nAs these events occurred about the beginning of the second millennium BC<\/span>, the term “shekel” would not represent the coin familiar from later periods but rather a certain weight of silver. At a later time the brothers of Joseph sold him to traveling merchants for 20 shekels of silver (Gn 37:28). Genesis 33:19 mentions another unit of weight for metal, the kesitah<\/em> (nlt<\/span> mg), in connection with the purchase of a field by Jacob; the term occurs again in Joshua 24:32 and Job 42:11. This unit may have represented an amount equivalent to the currency value for a lamb.<\/p>\nIn time large animals and material objects came to be considered extremely cumbersome as a means of exchange, and metal became increasingly popular. Transportation of large quantities of precious metal remained a problem, however, and a method had to be devised for easy recognition, accessibility, and storage of particular metals of value.<\/p>\nOver the years, fairly uniform shapes were designed for metals used in transactions. Silver could be piled or tied in bundles, as shown in Egyptian bas-reliefs, and the sons of Jacob took advantage of a similar method in transporting the purchase price of the grain they were buying from Egypt (Gn 42:35). About 1500 BC<\/span>, pieces of metal shaped in the form of ingots, bars, tongues, or heads of animals were in use, as well as gold discs and rings of gold wire. Perhaps the most popular pieces acceptable as currency were those that had also been designed as jewelry. The valuables listed among the spoil of the Midianites included gold chains, bracelets, signet rings, and earrings (Nm 31:50). The bracelets and rings in particular probably represented a standardized weight, and could therefore be used easily as currency. Rebekah received gifts from her fiancé that were in the form of jewelry of specific weight: a gold ring weighing half a shekel and two bracelets weighing ten gold shekels (Gn 24:22). Job was given a fine ring of gold by a number of relatives, and it is unlikely that they would all have given him the same gift if it did not in fact represent a certain monetary value (Jb 42:11).<\/p>\nThe requirement in Deuteronomy 14:25 to “bind up your money” would again imply either thin strips of silver that could be bundled together or rings that could be strung. In either event, transportation would be facilitated.<\/p>\nThe value for weights of silver mentioned in Mosaic times can best be understood in terms of purchasing power. A ram could be bought for two shekels, while fifty shekels was the price of about four bushels of barley (Lv 27:16). In the time of Elisha, during a good year, one and one-half pecks of fine flour or three pecks of barley could be bought for one shekel (2 Kgs 7:16). Needless to say, monetary valuations of this kind would be affected by such economic considerations as supply and demand.<\/p>\nEstimation by eye was an inaccurate means of judging the value of currency, and there is no doubt that cheating was prevalent in the weighing and examination of metal. The weighing, an essential part of every major transaction, was also very time-consuming. In order to ensure the correct value of the weights, which were usually pieces of bronze, iron, or dressed stones, they carried some sort of stamp. Once this practice was generally established, it was a short step to the stamping of the individual pieces of metal, whether tongues, bars, or bracelets, being used as currency. The next logical development was stamping a piece of silver to authenticate its value for purposes of currency. This was the precursor of the coin, which was not known in the ancient Near East prior to the exilic period. Therefore, any reference to money before that time indicates bars, bracelets, rings, or other metal objects, stamped or unstamped.<\/p>\nThe earliest minted coins came from the kingdom of Lydia in Asia Minor, being credited traditionally to Croesus (560–546 BC<\/span>), the fabulously wealthy ruler of that land. The coins from Lydia were made of electrum, a natural alloy of silver and gold, and they depicted a lion and a bull. Like most of the early coins, the reverse simply contained a punch mark.<\/p>\nOriginally a coin not only represented a value, but also its weight was worth the amount of silver or gold of its face value. Thus many of the early coins were slashed heavily by some ancient skeptics, who wished to be sure that the coin was of pure silver and not a less valuable metal coated with silver.<\/p>\nThe purity of silver or gold was also a factor in the popularity and acceptance of particular coins. Thus in Greek and Roman times the tetradrachma from Tyre was one of the most widely accepted silver coins because of the purity of its metal content.<\/p>\nThe use of coins did not eliminate the necessity for weighing, because the fraudulent clipping of the edges of coins was prevalent from their introduction in the sixth century BC<\/span>. This particular problem plagued all subsequent issues of coinage, and it was only in the late 18th century in Britain that it was surmounted by a process involving the milling, or reeding, of the edges of the more valuable coins.<\/p>\nIn the sixth century BC<\/span>, when the Jews returned from exile in Babylonia, coins were donated for the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem, as well as silver and gold in other forms. The gold coin mentioned is a “daric.” The term, apparently derived from the name of the great Persian king Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>), was in wide current use and even appears in biblical passages written at a later date but referring to a period before the reign of Darius (cf. 1 Chr 29:7).<\/p>\nFew craftsmen with the skills required for the manufacture of coins would have been available before the sixth century BC<\/span>, so the earliest gold darics were probably minted at Sardis. The mint itself was taken over by the Persians when they occupied the territory, with production continuing as before.<\/p>\nWestern sections of the Persian Empire probably used silver coins more frequently than gold. According to some traditions, coinage developed in Greece at Aegina about the time that the Lydians first adopted the concept. The earliest of these silver coins to be excavated so far dates from the sixth century BC<\/span> and was minted in northern Greece.<\/p>\nAlso in current use were the popular fifth-century BC<\/span> tetradrachmas from Athens, which had dies on both sides of the coin. These depicted the head of the goddess Athena and the sacred owl.<\/p>\nAlthough the silver content of many coins in contemporary use was lowered, that of the Athenian tetradrachma remained consistently at its original high standard of purity. This circumstance naturally increased its acceptability, especially in areas caught up in political turmoil where the purity of the local currency was particularly questionable. Because of the stability of the silver content of the coin and the rapidity with which the Greek Empire was expanding, the Athenian tetradrachma was minted and used almost unchanged over a period of 200 years. Many of these coins have been found in hoards all over the eastern Mediterranean.<\/p>\nThere is no doubt that by the fourth century BC<\/span> there was a local mint in Judea, for silver coins imitating the Athenian tetradrachma, but also bearing the legend “Jehud,” have been excavated there.<\/p>\nBecause of the extent of trade in Greek and Roman times, the coins from the larger centers had a general acceptance in all the Mediterranean coastal areas. They were also favored in the inland areas, especially in those traversed by trading routes or those that were part of a larger empire.<\/p>\nMints in Gaza, Joppa, and Tyre were established about the end of the fourth century BC<\/span> to produce local currency. At this period Sidon continued to be an important supplier of silver coins, as it had been since the fifth century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nAs the Seleucids gained control of Judea in 198 BC<\/span>, a period of political turmoil commenced when the Syrians tried to Hellenize the Jewish people. Resentment toward Greek culture and resistance to all tampering with the traditional Jewish faith increased steadily until it found an outlet in the leadership of Mattathias, father of the Maccabees, who began a guerrilla uprising in 167 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nWhen the fortunes of war shifted temporarily to the Maccabeans, King Antiochus of Syria granted Simon Maccabeus the right to mint his own coins (1 Macc 15:6), but before he could take advantage of this prime symbol of independence, the balance of power changed once more. Judea returned to its status as a tributary, and the permission to mint coinage was hastily withdrawn.<\/p>\nSimon’s son, John Hyrcanus, succeeded in overcoming the weakened Syrians and declared independence in 129 BC<\/span>. The small bronze coins minted about 110 BC<\/span> showed a wreath on the obverse bearing the inscription “Johanan the high priest and the community of the Jews.” The reverse displayed a double cornucopia with a poppy head, both of which were Greek symbols of plenty. These were the first genuinely Jewish coins.<\/p>\nWith the lack of skilled craftsmen and of a good mint it is hardly surprising that the resulting coins were simple and unpretentious. In consequence they were quite unlike the elaborate, and often delicate, designs of many contemporary coins.<\/p>\nMeanwhile, silver coins continued to be struck in the Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon on the orders of the Seleucids, and they remained the most popular silver coins in everyday use in Palestine until Roman times. Even then they continued to circulate side by side with the Roman coinage.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Banker, Banking; Coins; Money Changer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MONEY<\/h3>\nMedium of exchange, measurement of value, means of payment.<\/p>\nMoney was developed as a convenient medium of exchange to supplement and later to replace bartering, although the two systems operated concurrently for many centuries. From the patriarchal period to the present day, wealth has been measured in terms of goods and precious metals, particularly gold and silver, which remain universally acceptable mediums of exchange. Genesis 13:2 describes Abraham as “very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold.”<\/p>\nWealth in a nomadic or seminomadic society was frequently measured by the number of cattle a person possessed, and because of this, cattle were a readily acceptable and easily valued, if rather large, medium of exchange. The degree to which cattle were commonly recognized as the standard for value, wealth, and exchange is reflected in the Latin form for money, pecunia,<\/em> which is derived directly from pecus,<\/em> meaning “cattle.” For religious purposes, taxes or donations paid in cattle were most acceptable, and this not only increased the general recognition for this medium but also made the temple a repository for large herds of cattle, as well as smaller animals and produce, which, if they could not be used directly in the temple rituals, could be bartered for whatever commodities were required. Perishable foods were less popular for purposes of exchange than animals such as sheep and asses, although timber, wine, and honey were regularly used as a form of currency (1 Sm 8:15; 2 Kgs 3:4; Ez 45:13-16). Both public and private taxes, tribute, and debts of all kinds were settled by this means. Solomon paid Hiram, king of Tyre, in wheat and olive oil for his assistance in the construction of the temple (1 Kgs 5:11), and in the eighth century BC<\/span> taxes were commonly paid in jars of wine or olive oil. Tribute in the form of sheep and wool is recorded in 2 Kings 3:4.<\/p>\nAll the means of exchange mentioned represented goods that could be measured or counted, and attempts were made to establish a standard rate of exchange for them in relation to each other.<\/p>\nSilver was the precious metal most readily available in the ancient Near East and was therefore the one most frequently mentioned in connection with purchases by weight, and at a later period by coin. The first recorded instance in the Bible of silver being used as a medium of exchange occurs in Genesis 20:14-16, where Abraham received a payment of 1,000 shekels by weight of silver, as well as animals and slaves. Abraham also purchased the field and cave of Machpelah for 400 shekels of silver (Gn 23:15-16), which according to the custom of the day had to be weighed out in front of the vendor and checked by witnesses (cf. Jer 32:9-10).<\/p>\nAs these events occurred about the beginning of the second millennium BC<\/span>, the term “shekel” would not represent the coin familiar from later periods but rather a certain weight of silver. At a later time the brothers of Joseph sold him to traveling merchants for 20 shekels of silver (Gn 37:28). Genesis 33:19 mentions another unit of weight for metal, the kesitah<\/em> (nlt<\/span> mg), in connection with the purchase of a field by Jacob; the term occurs again in Joshua 24:32 and Job 42:11. This unit may have represented an amount equivalent to the currency value for a lamb.<\/p>\nIn time large animals and material objects came to be considered extremely cumbersome as a means of exchange, and metal became increasingly popular. Transportation of large quantities of precious metal remained a problem, however, and a method had to be devised for easy recognition, accessibility, and storage of particular metals of value.<\/p>\nOver the years, fairly uniform shapes were designed for metals used in transactions. Silver could be piled or tied in bundles, as shown in Egyptian bas-reliefs, and the sons of Jacob took advantage of a similar method in transporting the purchase price of the grain they were buying from Egypt (Gn 42:35). About 1500 BC<\/span>, pieces of metal shaped in the form of ingots, bars, tongues, or heads of animals were in use, as well as gold discs and rings of gold wire. Perhaps the most popular pieces acceptable as currency were those that had also been designed as jewelry. The valuables listed among the spoil of the Midianites included gold chains, bracelets, signet rings, and earrings (Nm 31:50). The bracelets and rings in particular probably represented a standardized weight, and could therefore be used easily as currency. Rebekah received gifts from her fiancé that were in the form of jewelry of specific weight: a gold ring weighing half a shekel and two bracelets weighing ten gold shekels (Gn 24:22). Job was given a fine ring of gold by a number of relatives, and it is unlikely that they would all have given him the same gift if it did not in fact represent a certain monetary value (Jb 42:11).<\/p>\nThe requirement in Deuteronomy 14:25 to “bind up your money” would again imply either thin strips of silver that could be bundled together or rings that could be strung. In either event, transportation would be facilitated.<\/p>\nThe value for weights of silver mentioned in Mosaic times can best be understood in terms of purchasing power. A ram could be bought for two shekels, while fifty shekels was the price of about four bushels of barley (Lv 27:16). In the time of Elisha, during a good year, one and one-half pecks of fine flour or three pecks of barley could be bought for one shekel (2 Kgs 7:16). Needless to say, monetary valuations of this kind would be affected by such economic considerations as supply and demand.<\/p>\nEstimation by eye was an inaccurate means of judging the value of currency, and there is no doubt that cheating was prevalent in the weighing and examination of metal. The weighing, an essential part of every major transaction, was also very time-consuming. In order to ensure the correct value of the weights, which were usually pieces of bronze, iron, or dressed stones, they carried some sort of stamp. Once this practice was generally established, it was a short step to the stamping of the individual pieces of metal, whether tongues, bars, or bracelets, being used as currency. The next logical development was stamping a piece of silver to authenticate its value for purposes of currency. This was the precursor of the coin, which was not known in the ancient Near East prior to the exilic period. Therefore, any reference to money before that time indicates bars, bracelets, rings, or other metal objects, stamped or unstamped.<\/p>\nThe earliest minted coins came from the kingdom of Lydia in Asia Minor, being credited traditionally to Croesus (560–546 BC<\/span>), the fabulously wealthy ruler of that land. The coins from Lydia were made of electrum, a natural alloy of silver and gold, and they depicted a lion and a bull. Like most of the early coins, the reverse simply contained a punch mark.<\/p>\nOriginally a coin not only represented a value, but also its weight was worth the amount of silver or gold of its face value. Thus many of the early coins were slashed heavily by some ancient skeptics, who wished to be sure that the coin was of pure silver and not a less valuable metal coated with silver.<\/p>\nThe purity of silver or gold was also a factor in the popularity and acceptance of particular coins. Thus in Greek and Roman times the tetradrachma from Tyre was one of the most widely accepted silver coins because of the purity of its metal content.<\/p>\nThe use of coins did not eliminate the necessity for weighing, because the fraudulent clipping of the edges of coins was prevalent from their introduction in the sixth century BC<\/span>. This particular problem plagued all subsequent issues of coinage, and it was only in the late 18th century in Britain that it was surmounted by a process involving the milling, or reeding, of the edges of the more valuable coins.<\/p>\nIn the sixth century BC<\/span>, when the Jews returned from exile in Babylonia, coins were donated for the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem, as well as silver and gold in other forms. The gold coin mentioned is a “daric.” The term, apparently derived from the name of the great Persian king Darius I (521–486 BC<\/span>), was in wide current use and even appears in biblical passages written at a later date but referring to a period before the reign of Darius (cf. 1 Chr 29:7).<\/p>\nFew craftsmen with the skills required for the manufacture of coins would have been available before the sixth century BC<\/span>, so the earliest gold darics were probably minted at Sardis. The mint itself was taken over by the Persians when they occupied the territory, with production continuing as before.<\/p>\nWestern sections of the Persian Empire probably used silver coins more frequently than gold. According to some traditions, coinage developed in Greece at Aegina about the time that the Lydians first adopted the concept. The earliest of these silver coins to be excavated so far dates from the sixth century BC<\/span> and was minted in northern Greece.<\/p>\nAlso in current use were the popular fifth-century BC<\/span> tetradrachmas from Athens, which had dies on both sides of the coin. These depicted the head of the goddess Athena and the sacred owl.<\/p>\nAlthough the silver content of many coins in contemporary use was lowered, that of the Athenian tetradrachma remained consistently at its original high standard of purity. This circumstance naturally increased its acceptability, especially in areas caught up in political turmoil where the purity of the local currency was particularly questionable. Because of the stability of the silver content of the coin and the rapidity with which the Greek Empire was expanding, the Athenian tetradrachma was minted and used almost unchanged over a period of 200 years. Many of these coins have been found in hoards all over the eastern Mediterranean.<\/p>\nThere is no doubt that by the fourth century BC<\/span> there was a local mint in Judea, for silver coins imitating the Athenian tetradrachma, but also bearing the legend “Jehud,” have been excavated there.<\/p>\nBecause of the extent of trade in Greek and Roman times, the coins from the larger centers had a general acceptance in all the Mediterranean coastal areas. They were also favored in the inland areas, especially in those traversed by trading routes or those that were part of a larger empire.<\/p>\nMints in Gaza, Joppa, and Tyre were established about the end of the fourth century BC<\/span> to produce local currency. At this period Sidon continued to be an important supplier of silver coins, as it had been since the fifth century BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nAs the Seleucids gained control of Judea in 198 BC<\/span>, a period of political turmoil commenced when the Syrians tried to Hellenize the Jewish people. Resentment toward Greek culture and resistance to all tampering with the traditional Jewish faith increased steadily until it found an outlet in the leadership of Mattathias, father of the Maccabees, who began a guerrilla uprising in 167 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nWhen the fortunes of war shifted temporarily to the Maccabeans, King Antiochus of Syria granted Simon Maccabeus the right to mint his own coins (1 Macc 15:6), but before he could take advantage of this prime symbol of independence, the balance of power changed once more. Judea returned to its status as a tributary, and the permission to mint coinage was hastily withdrawn.<\/p>\nSimon’s son, John Hyrcanus, succeeded in overcoming the weakened Syrians and declared independence in 129 BC<\/span>. The small bronze coins minted about 110 BC<\/span> showed a wreath on the obverse bearing the inscription “Johanan the high priest and the community of the Jews.” The reverse displayed a double cornucopia with a poppy head, both of which were Greek symbols of plenty. These were the first genuinely Jewish coins.<\/p>\nWith the lack of skilled craftsmen and of a good mint it is hardly surprising that the resulting coins were simple and unpretentious. In consequence they were quite unlike the elaborate, and often delicate, designs of many contemporary coins.<\/p>\nMeanwhile, silver coins continued to be struck in the Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon on the orders of the Seleucids, and they remained the most popular silver coins in everyday use in Palestine until Roman times. Even then they continued to circulate side by side with the Roman coinage.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Banker, Banking; Coins; Money Changer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MONEY Medium of exchange, measurement of value, means of payment. Money was developed as a convenient medium of exchange to supplement and later to replace bartering, although the two systems operated concurrently for many centuries. From the patriarchal period to the present day, wealth has been measured in terms of goods and precious metals, particularly gold and silver, which remain universally acceptable mediums of exchange. Genesis 13:2 describes Abraham as “very rich in cattle, in silve...","summary_en":"MONEY Medium of exchange, measurement of value, means of payment. Money was developed as a convenient medium of exchange to supplement and later to replace bartering, although the two systems operated concurrently for many centuries. From the patriarchal period to the present day, wealth has been measured in terms of goods and precious metals, particularly gold and silver, which remain universally acceptable mediums of exchange. Genesis 13:2 describes Abraham as “very rich in cattle, in silve...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":53384,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:13","content_ro":"45:13-17<\/strong> The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement<\/em> at the new Temple by means of a tax<\/em> paid to the prince<\/em>. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations<\/em>,<\/em> and the Sabbath days<\/em>. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"45:13-17<\/strong> The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement<\/em> at the new Temple by means of a tax<\/em> paid to the prince<\/em>. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations<\/em>,<\/em> and the Sabbath days<\/em>. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:13-17 The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement at the new Temple by means of a tax paid to the prince. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations, and the Sabbath days. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the Lord.","summary_en":"45:13-17 The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement at the new Temple by means of a tax paid to the prince. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations, and the Sabbath days. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":81010,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:13","content_ro":"45:13-17<\/strong> The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement<\/em> at the new Temple by means of a tax<\/em> paid to the prince<\/em>. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations<\/em>,<\/em> and the Sabbath days<\/em>. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"45:13-17<\/strong> The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement<\/em> at the new Temple by means of a tax<\/em> paid to the prince<\/em>. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations<\/em>,<\/em> and the Sabbath days<\/em>. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:13-17 The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement at the new Temple by means of a tax paid to the prince. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations, and the Sabbath days. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the Lord.","summary_en":"45:13-17 The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement at the new Temple by means of a tax paid to the prince. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations, and the Sabbath days. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108636,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:13","content_ro":"45:13-17<\/strong> The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement<\/em> at the new Temple by means of a tax<\/em> paid to the prince<\/em>. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations<\/em>,<\/em> and the Sabbath days<\/em>. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"45:13-17<\/strong> The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement<\/em> at the new Temple by means of a tax<\/em> paid to the prince<\/em>. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations<\/em>,<\/em> and the Sabbath days<\/em>. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:13-17 The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement at the new Temple by means of a tax paid to the prince. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations, and the Sabbath days. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the Lord.","summary_en":"45:13-17 The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement at the new Temple by means of a tax paid to the prince. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations, and the Sabbath days. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136262,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:13","content_ro":"45:13-17<\/strong> The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement<\/em> at the new Temple by means of a tax<\/em> paid to the prince<\/em>. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations<\/em>,<\/em> and the Sabbath days<\/em>. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"45:13-17<\/strong> The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement<\/em> at the new Temple by means of a tax<\/em> paid to the prince<\/em>. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations<\/em>,<\/em> and the Sabbath days<\/em>. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:13-17 The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement at the new Temple by means of a tax paid to the prince. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations, and the Sabbath days. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the Lord.","summary_en":"45:13-17 The people were to provide for the regular daily offerings that will make atonement at the new Temple by means of a tax paid to the prince. The prince was to provide all of the offerings for special occasions, such as the religious festivals, the new moon celebrations, and the Sabbath days. Both the regular daily offerings and the special festival offerings functioned to purify the people of Israel, making them right with the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":67184,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation","title_en":"The Message of Reconciliation","content_ro":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\nReconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\nPaul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\nWith the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\nThose who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\nReconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\nPaul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\nWith the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\nThose who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","summary_en":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94810,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation","title_en":"The Message of Reconciliation","content_ro":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\nReconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\nPaul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\nWith the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\nThose who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\nReconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\nPaul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\nWith the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\nThose who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","summary_en":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122436,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation","title_en":"The Message of Reconciliation","content_ro":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\nReconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\nPaul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\nWith the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\nThose who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\nReconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\nPaul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\nWith the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\nThose who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","summary_en":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150062,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation","title_en":"The Message of Reconciliation","content_ro":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\nReconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\nPaul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\nWith the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\nThose who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\nReconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\nPaul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\nWith the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\nThose who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nEzek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","summary_en":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":12148,"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>\nOccasions 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\nIn 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 mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term mishteh<\/span>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\nFeasts and Their Functions<\/p>\nEach 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>\nOld Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\nThese 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>\nBirthdays 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>\nIn 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>\nThe 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>\nThis 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nAnother 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>\nIn 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>\nStill 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>\nThree 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 hag<\/span>,<\/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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nThis 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>\nThere 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>\nThe 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>\nAnother 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 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>\nNew Testament Festivals<\/p>\nIn 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>\nThe 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, 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>\nJesus 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>\nSymbolism of Feasts<\/p>\nMany 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>\nSee also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\nOccasions 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\nIn 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 mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term mishteh<\/span>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\nFeasts and Their Functions<\/p>\nEach 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>\nOld Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\nThese 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>\nBirthdays 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>\nIn 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>\nThe 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>\nThis 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nAnother 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>\nIn 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>\nStill 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>\nThree 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 hag<\/span>,<\/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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nThis 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>\nThere 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>\nThe 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>\nAnother 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 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>\nNew Testament Festivals<\/p>\nIn 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>\nThe 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, 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>\nJesus 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>\nSymbolism of Feasts<\/p>\nMany 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>\nSee 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":28184,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offerings and Sacrifices","title_en":"Offerings and Sacrifices","content_ro":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\nMajor ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nPerformance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\nThe grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\nThe sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\nThe second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\nThe burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\nThe order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\nEach section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\nIn other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\nWhen prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\nFor sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\nThe description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\nThe same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\nThe book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\nThe same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\nThe procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\nDescription of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\nThese two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\nThe offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\nThe choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\nThese rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\nBurnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\nExcept for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\nThe great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\nCertain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\nA grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\nPeace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\nA special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\nDrink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\nThese sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\nThe first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\nThe priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\nThe ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\nOnly three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES<\/h3>\nMajor ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nPerformance and Order of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial ritual is the opening section of Leviticus (Lv 1–7). It consists of two separate parts. The first (1:1–6:7) is didactic, dealing with two categories of sacrifice: those of a “pleasing odor,” namely, the burnt (1:1-17), the grain (2:1-16), and the peace offerings (3:1-17); and the expiatory sacrifices, namely, the sin (4:1–5:13) and the guilt or trespass offerings (5:14–6:7). Attention is paid to the minute details of each ritual, and they are grouped according to their logical or conceptual associations.<\/p>\nThe grain (or cereal) offering follows the burnt offering because it always accompanied it in actual practice (Nm 15:1-21; chs 28–29); it also went with the peace offering (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:3-4). Special emphasis is placed on burning the inward parts of a sacrifice on the altar to make a “pleasing odor to the Lord” (Lv 1:9, 17; 2:2, 9, 12; 3:5, 11, 16). When the Lord smelled the pleasing odor (Gn 8:21), it was a sign of divine favor; refusal indicated God’s displeasure (Lv 26:31). The officiating priest evidently knew how to read the signs and would tell the offerer whether his sacrifice had been accepted (1 Sm 26:19; cf. Am 5:21-23).<\/p>\nThe sin and guilt offerings were expiatory (Lv 4:1–6:7, 20). The situations requiring such offerings are listed, and special emphasis is laid on the handling of the blood in the ritual.<\/p>\nThe second major section in this passage (Lv 6:8–7:38) stresses the administrative details for the various offerings. This section consists of a series of “instructions” for each type of offering pertaining to the distribution of the sacrificial materials. Some went to the priest(s), some went to the offerer, and others were burned on the altar or disposed of outside the camp. Those sacrifices designated as “most holy” were to be eaten only by qualified members of the priesthood (Lv 2:3, 10; 10:12-17; 14:13; Nm 18:9).<\/p>\nThe burnt offering is discussed first because it was entirely consumed on the altar (and thus not eaten by anyone). After it, there follow the sacrifices distributed to the officiants (Lv 6:17, 26, 29; 7:1, 6), and at the end come the peace offerings, a significant portion of which was returned to the offender.<\/p>\nThe order in which the sacrifices are treated in this passage also corresponds to their relative frequency in the rituals of the sacred calendar (Nm 28:19; 2 Chr 31:3; Ez 45:17). This would be particularly important for the priests and Levites on duty at the temple because they were responsible for the logistics of the daily sacrificial ritual, especially on the high holidays; management of the temple storehouse was a formidable task (1 Chr 23:28-32; 26:15, 20-22; 2 Chr 13:10-11; 30:3-19; 34:9-11).<\/p>\nEach section concerning a particular offering concludes with the logistic or administrative details peculiar to it. There then follows a summary of the matters treated thus far (Lv 7:7-10), and the section concludes with a treatment of the peace offerings (vv 11-36). The latter did not play a role in the sacred calendar except during the Feast of Weeks (23:19-20); on all other occasions, with the two exceptions of the Nazirite vow and the installation of the priesthood, peace offerings were purely voluntary sacrifices and thus not subject to any fixed bookkeeping.<\/p>\nIn other biblical contexts, the sacrifices are listed according to the same “bookkeeping” or “administrative” order: burnt, grain, and drink; sin (or guilt); and sometimes peace offerings. An example is the roster of donations made by the tribal leaders for dedication of the altar (Nm 7). The information is organized like an everyday ledger from the temple storehouse; the summary classifies the animals as burnt, grain, sin, and peace offerings (vv 87-88) in accordance with the respective entries from each donor (vv 15-17). The Levitical scribe had two purposes for such a record: to credit the offerers and to record the treasures and food supplies coming in. Much of the foodstuffs being given as offerings was actually apportioned to the officiating priests (Nm 18:8-11; 2 Chr 31:4-19).<\/p>\nWhen prescriptions were made as to the type and number of offerings to be brought (e.g., Nm 15:24), the “bookkeeping” order is generally followed. This was true of the calendarial sacrifices; burnt and grain offerings and libations were listed, followed by a sin offering for each of the following: New Moon (Nm 28:11-15), each day of Passover (vv 19-22), the Festival of Weeks (Lv 23:18-19; Nm 28:27-30), Trumpets (29:2-5), Day of Atonement (vv 8-11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 12-16).<\/p>\nFor sacrifices required in specific cases, the instructions as to what offerings to bring follow this sequence (e.g., the purification of a woman after giving birth, Lv 12:6-8). Note also the offerings given at the successful termination of a Nazirite vow; the Nazirite brought burnt, sin, and peace offerings (with some special grain offerings, Nm 6:14-15). However, the priest conducted the actual ritual according to a different order; the sin offering was made first, followed by the burnt offering and finally the peace offering (vv 16-17). In the case of an incomplete vow, the first step was to offer a sin offering and then a burnt offering to renew the vow (v 11). The reconsecration of the Nazirite required a separate guilt offering—a distinct ritual act (v 12).<\/p>\nThe description of the offerings made by the prince of Israel in the latter days presents the same contrast between the two orders of sacrifices. On festival holidays the prince brought burnt, grain, and drink offerings, but he offered them as sin, grain, burnt, and peace offerings (Ez 45:17). This second order of sacrifices in which the sin offering precedes the burnt offering was also followed in the rededication of the altar (43:18-27).<\/p>\nThe same “procedural” sequence of sacrifices appears in other instances: the purification of the leper—guilt and sin offerings (Lv 14:19), followed by a burnt offering (vv 12-20); the man with a discharge—sin and burnt offerings (15:15); likewise the woman with a discharge (v 30). The same order is followed for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement (16:3-6, 11, 15, 24).<\/p>\nThe book of Leviticus furnishes two examples of the proper order in which sacrifices were offered. One is the ordination of Aaron and his sons. The sin offering came first and then the burnt offering (Ex 29:10-18; Lv 8:14-21). The focal point in this ritual was the sacrifice of ordination, or literally “installation,” a special form of peace offering (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-29). The second passage is the formal inauguration of the sacrificial system at the tabernacle (Lv 9). The sacrifices for Aaron were sin and burnt offerings, followed by those for the people: sin, burnt, grain, and peace offerings (9:7-22).<\/p>\nThe same sequence is followed at the cleansing and restoration of the temple in Jerusalem conducted by King Hezekiah (2 Chr 29:20-36). A great sin offering was first, followed by the burnt offerings accompanied by music and song. Then the king proclaimed that the people had committed themselves to the Lord; in this new state of purity they could now share in the sacrifices of devotion (burnt offerings) and thanksgiving (peace offerings).<\/p>\nThe procedural order of the sacrifices embodies the OT ideology of how God may be approached. First, atonement for sin had to be made and then total consecration of self; these are symbolized by the sin and\/or guilt offerings and the burnt and grain offerings, respectively. When these conditions were met, the offerer could express his continued devotion by more burnt offerings and also take part in the fellowship sacrifices (peace offerings) in which he himself got a large portion of the slaughtered animal (to share with his friends and the poor in his community; Dt 12:17-19).<\/p>\nDescription of Sacrifices<\/p>\nThe ensuing description of the different types of sacrifice will treat them in accordance with the “procedural” order, that is, as symbolic stages in one’s approach to God.<\/p>\n<h5>Expiation<\/h5>\nThese two offerings were required for making atonement for sins and trespasses:<\/p>\n1. Sin offering (Lv 4:1–5:13; 6:24-30). Different animals were specified in accordance with the rank of the offerer. A high priest had to bring a young bull (4:3), as did the congregation as a whole (v 14), except when the matter was a ritual infraction (Nm 15:24). A ruler would bring a male goat (Lv 4:23), but a commoner could provide a female goat (v 28; Nm 15:27) or a lamb (Lv 4:32). If he was indigent, he could offer two turtledoves or two young pigeons (one of which would be a burnt offering; 5:7), or if he was extremely poor, he might even substitute a tenth of an ephah of fine flour (Lv 5:11-13; cf. Heb 9:22).<\/p>\n\nThe offerer brought the animal to the entrance of the temple court and laid his hand on it (Lv 4:4). He did not confess his sin in this act because the animal was not being sent away (cf. the goat for Azazel, 16:21); rather, he was identifying himself with the sacrifice. The offerer had to kill the animal on the north side of the altar (4:24, 29). The animals were never slaughtered on the altar proper. The officiating priest collected the blood; when it was a bull for himself or for the congregation, he sprinkled some of the blood before the veil inside the tent of meeting and put some on the horns of the incense altar (vv 5-7, 16-18). On the Day of Atonement he brought the sacrificial blood for himself and for the people into the Holy of Holies (16:14-15). From all other animals, the blood was applied to the horns of the altar of burnt offering (4:25, 30, 34); the blood of fowl was sprinkled on the side of the altar (5:9). Finally, the remaining blood from any offering was poured or drained out at the base of the altar (4:7).<\/p>\nThe choicest of the internal organs, namely, the fatty tissue over and on the entrails, the two kidneys and their fat, and the appendage to the liver, were all offered to the Lord on the altar (Lv 4:8-10). The carcass and the other entrails were burned outside the camp when it was a bull for the priest or for the people. This was also true of the bull for the ordination of the priests (Ex 29:10-14; Lv 8:14-17). Otherwise, the priest who conducted the rites received the edible flesh as his portion. He had to eat it within the temple area, and its preparation was governed by strict rules of ritual purity (Lv 6:25-30; cf. 10:16-20). A sin offering of one male goat was presented at each of the sacred holidays: the New Moon (Nm 28:15), each day of Passover (vv 22-24), the Festival of Weeks (v 30), the Festival of Trumpets (29:5), the Day of Atonement (v 11), and each day of the Feast of Tabernacles (vv 16, 19). The high priest also offered a bull for himself and then sacrificed one of the two goats on the Day of Atonement. Certain purification rites required lesser sin offerings, namely, lambs or birds: childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), cleansing from leprosy (14:12-14, 19-22), and abscesses and hemorrhages (15:14-15, 29-30) or after defilement while under a vow (Nm 6:10-11).<\/p>\n<li>2. Guilt offering (Lv 5:14–6:7; 7:1-7). The guilt or trespass offering was a special kind of sin offering (cf. 5:7) required whenever someone had been denied his rightful due. Reparation of the valued amount that had been defrauded had to be made, plus a fine of one-fifth (5:16; 6:5). The animal was usually a ram (5:15, 18; 6:6). The cleansed leper and the defiled Nazirite had to bring a male lamb (Lv 14:12, 21; Nm 6:12). The offerer apparently handled the sacrifice as he would a sin offering, but the priest had to sprinkle the blood around the altar (Lv 7:2). Viscera were burned on the altar as usual (vv 3-5). Some of the blood was then applied to the tip of the cleansed leper’s right ear and to his right thumb and big toe (14:14). Again the priest received most of the animal’s flesh for food (7:6-7; 14:13). A guilt offering was required whenever another party had suffered some loss. Ritual infractions, such as eating the “holy things” without proper authorization (5:14-19; 22:14), called for payment of the sum that should have gone to the Lord plus the fine of one-fifth that went to the priest (Lv 5:16; 2 Kgs 12:16). The leper belongs in this category, since during the time of his infection he was unable to render service to God (Lv 14:12-18). The same applies to the Nazirite who had suffered defilement while he was set apart to God by the vow; thus a guilt offering was required (Nm 6:12). Violation of another person’s property rights could be expiated only by the guilt offering and its additional one-fifth. Such matters included cheating on deposits or security, robbery or oppression, failing to report the find of some lost property, or false swearing or failing to testify (Lv 6:1-5). Intercourse with a betrothed slave girl was also a violation of property rights (19:20-22). If the offended party was no longer living and had no surviving kinsmen, the payment went to the priest (Nm 5:5-10).<\/li>\n<h5>Consecration Offerings<\/h5>\nThese rituals usually come to mind when one hears the word “offering.” They represent acts of personal commitment that must accompany the repentance expressed in the sin and guilt offerings. They were also a prerequisite for the fellowship or communal sacrifices that might follow.<\/p>\n1. Burnt offering (Lv 1:3-17; 6:8-13). The burnt offering could be a bull, a sheep, or a bird. The offerer presented the animal, laid his hand on it, and killed it on the north side of the altar. The bird was simply given to the priest. The latter collected the blood, presented it before God, and then sprinkled it around the altar. When the offering was a bird, he wrung off its head and drained the blood at the side of the altar. Though the slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood relates the burnt offering to the expiatory sacrifices of the previous section, the main emphasis here is on killing the animal, washing its unclean parts, and then carefully arranging all of the pieces on the altar. All of this was then consumed on the altar as a pleasing odor to the Lord. Since burnt offerings were offered morning and evening, a good supply of wood by the altar was necessary. The officiating priest, dressed in proper garments, had to keep the fire burning continuously (6:8-13).<\/p>\nBurnt offerings played a prominent role in the sacrifices of the ritual calendar. The continual burnt offering was made twice a day, a male lamb morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Nm 28:1-8). Two additional lambs were sacrificed each Sabbath (Nm 28:9-10).<\/p>\nExcept for these daily offerings, a sin offering of one goat was usually made along with the burnt offerings on the following holidays: For the New Moon at the beginning of each month, two young bulls, one ram, and seven male lambs were offered (Nm 28:11-14). The same were required for each day of the Passover festival (vv 19-24) and again on the Feast of Weeks (vv 6-29). On the Festival of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, the requirement was one bull, one ram, and seven lambs (29:2-4).<\/p>\nThe great Feast of Tabernacles was characterized by a series of elaborate burnt offerings, plus one goat per day as a sin offering. On the first day, 13 young bulls, 2 rams, and 14 male lambs were offered (Nm 29:12-16). Each successive day, the number of bulls was decreased by one until on the seventh day there were only seven (the rams and lambs remained the same; 29:17-25). On the eighth day the animals required for Trumpets and Atonement were offered, namely, one bull, one ram, and seven lambs.<\/p>\nCertain rituals of purification also required burnt offerings in addition to sin offerings: after childbirth (Lv 12:6-8), abscesses (15:14-15), and discharges (vv 29-30); or after defilement while under a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:10-11). Though it is not stated that grain offerings were required in these cases, they certainly were for the cleansing from leprosy (Lv 14:10, 19-22, 31) and the completion of the Nazirite vow (Nm 6:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. Grain (Cereal) offering (Lv 2; 6:14-23). The Hebrew term referring to this particular offering means “gift,” or “offering,” including animals (Gn 4:3-5; Jgs 6:18; 1 Sm 2:17). But in the specific sacrificial context it signifies a combination of fine flour, olive oil, and frankincense that could be made up in the form of baked loaves, wafers, or morsels. The offering of firstfruits was to be crushed heads of new grain (Lv 2:14). No leaven or honey was permitted on the cakes, although those same commodities could be accepted as a firstfruit offering. They would not go to the altar but were given to the priest. The offerer had to bring the prepared loaves or wafers to the temple. The priest would burn one handful on the altar as its “memorial portion” (v 2), keeping the remainder for his own food (6:16; 7:9). But when the priest was making a grain offering on his own behalf, he burnt it all on the altar (6:22-23).<\/li>\nA grain offering was usually given with every burnt offering, especially those pertaining to the sacred calendar (Nm 28–29). The amounts of flour and oil were set according to the animal being sacrificed: three-tenths of an ephah of flour and one-half a hin of oil for a bull, two-tenths ephah and one-third hin for a ram, and one-tenth ephah plus one-fourth hin for a lamb (15:2-10). Other happy occasions for a grain offering included the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:10, 20-21, 31; unspecified quantity of grain with a bird) and the successful consummation of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:13-15).<\/p>\nPeace offerings were invariably followed by grain offerings (Lv 7:12-14; Nm 15:4). The priest received one of each pair of cakes or wafers. The remainder was returned to the offerer to be eaten with the flesh of the sacrificial animal at a place of his choice.<\/p>\nA special case where such offering was used was the one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal required in the jealousy ritual. It was to have no oil or frankincense (Nm 5:15, 18, 25-26). A very poor individual was permitted to bring one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense as a sin offering (Lv 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<li>3. Drink offering (Nm 15:1-10). The standard libation was one-fourth of a hin of wine for a lamb, one-third for a ram, and one-half for a bull. The wine (Ex 29:40), also called “strong drink” (Nm 28:7), is probably an intentional substitute for the blood used by other nations (Ps 16:4). The libation was classed as a “pleasing odor” offering (Nm 15:7). As with the burnt offering, the entire drink offering was expended; nothing was given to the priest (28:7).<\/li>\nDrink offerings accompanied the daily offering (Ex 29:40-41; Nm 28:7) and the Sabbath offering (Nm 28:9), as well as the New Moon festival. Reference is also made to them in connection with the second and following days of the Feast of Tabernacles (29:18, 21); for the first day their absence is probably unintentional. The same might hold true for the Passover, Firstfruits, and Feast of Trumpets (Nm 28:16–29:11; cf. Ez 45:11). A libation was required for the rites concluding a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17) but not for cleansing a leper (Lv 14:10-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship Offerings<\/h5>\nThese sacrifices were voluntary on the part of the offerer and generally not imposed by regulations except for the Nazirite (Nm 6:17) and the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20). An offerer who had already fulfilled the ritual requirements for atonement and personal consecration was permitted to make a fellowship offering. Burnt offerings often accompanied the fellowship sacrifices as a further expression of devotion.<\/p>\n1. Peace offering (Lv 3; 7:11-36; Am 5:22). This is the basic class of all fellowship or communal offerings; the others are simply subclasses of the peace offering. In terms of holiness, or restrictedness, they were not so rigidly confined as the other offerings. Animals from the herd or flock, male or female (Lv 3:1, 6, 12), were permitted. The usual stipulation of freedom from blemish was in force, except in the case of the freewill offering, in which the animal could have one limb longer than the other (22:23). Unleavened cakes were also required, at least for the thank (7:12-13) and Nazirite (Nm 6:15-19) offerings. Each of these three types of peace offerings will be discussed below, with their special features.<\/p>\nThe first parts of the ritual—the presentation and laying on of the hand—were identical to those of the other sacrifices. However, the animal was slaughtered at the door of the sanctuary courtyard and not on the north side of the altar (Lv 3:1-2, 7-8, 12-13; 7:29-30). The priest collected the blood and tossed it against the altar as he did with the burnt offering (3:2, 8, 13). The choice viscera were offered up as a “pleasing odor” (3:3-5, 6-11, 14-16).<\/p>\nThe priest also received a certain portion of the offering. He was allowed to eat it in any ritually clean place and to share it with his family (Lv 7:14, 30-36; Nm 6:20), in contrast to his portion of other sacrifices, which he had to eat somewhere in the temple compound (Nm 18:10-11). He received one of the cakes and the breast as a wave offering and the right thigh as a contribution for the offerer. This latter is the so-called “heave offering”; the technical term developed from a root signifying “to be high” and meaning “that which is lifted up.” The heave offering did not really represent a special kind of ritual ceremony.<\/p>\nThe ritual act of the peace offering culminated with a fellowship meal. Except for those parts on the altar or given to the priest, the body of the animal was returned to the man who offered it. He had to prepare it as a communal meal for himself, for his family, and for the Levite in his community (Dt 12:12, 18-19). This would have to be at the official sanctuary (Dt 12:6-7, 11-12, 15-19; cf. 1 Sm 1:3-4) and the participants had to observe strict rules of purity (Lv 7:19-21; 19:5-8). It may be contrasted with the ritual slaughtering of animals for a banquet that was permitted at any local altar (Dt 12:16, 20-22). The flesh of the thank offering had to be eaten on the same day of the sacrifice (Lv 7:15), while that of the votive or freewill offerings could be finished off on the following day (vv 16-18). Whatever remained then had to be burned before the time limit expired.<\/p>\nOnly three times is there a specific demand for a peace offering: in the Feast of Weeks (Lv 23:19-20), upon completion of a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:17-20), and at the installation of the priesthood (Ex 29:19-22, 28). Other public ritual occasions included the inauguration of the temple (1 Kgs 8:63; 2 Chr 7:5). Events on a national level that evoked the peace offering were the successful conclusion of a military campaign (1 Sm 11:15), the end of a famine or pestilence (2 Sm 24:25), confirmation of a candidate to the throne (1 Kgs 1:9, 19), or a time of religious revival (2 Chr 29:31-36). On the local level, they were offered at the annual family reunion (1 Sm 20:6) or other festive occasions, such as the harvest of the firstfruits (Ex 22:29-31; 1 Sm 9:11-14, 22-24; 16:4-5).<\/p>\n<li>2. Wave offering. The first portion of the peace offering was “waved” before the Lord to signify that the priest was eating it as a representative of God (the actual motion evidently resembled the wielding of a saw or a staff, Is 10:15). The same technical term, “wave offering,” was also used for other kinds of offering: precious metals donated for making the cultic artifacts (Ex 35:22; 38:29) and the guilt offering of the cleansed leper (Lv 14:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. Freewill offering. These gifts, brought to the holy convocations that took place three times per year (Ex 23:16; 34:20; Dt 16:10, 16-17; 2 Chr 35:8; Ezr 3:5), were voluntary (Lv 7:16; 22:18, 21-23; 23:28; Nm 15:3; 29:39; Dt 12:6, 17). Like the voluntary offering, the freewill offering could be a burnt rather than a peace offering (Lv 22:17-24; Ez 46:12). If it was the latter, the flesh could be eaten on the second day but must be burned before the third (Lv 7:16-17). Unlike some other peace offerings, the animal being sacrificed could have one limb longer than the other (22:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Installation offering. This Hebrew term refers to the settings of precious stones (Ex 25:7; 35:9, 27; 1 Chr 29:2), so “installation” seems an appropriate translation. It had to do with “filling the hand,” a ritual act that consecrated someone to divine service (Ex 28:41; cf. 32:29) and required ritual purity and spiritual devotion (2 Chr 29:31). The details of the original ceremony at the installation of the first priest is described in two passages (Ex 29:19-34; Lv 8:22-32).<\/li>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","summary_en":"OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES Major ritual expressions of religious life with accompanying rites, such as libations, effusions, and sacred meals. The ideology expressed in Israel’s ritual complex made its religion unique in the ancient Near East. The concepts of OT ritual also underlie NT theology with regard to sin and reconciliation to God through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Performance and Order of Sacrifices The main source for a description of the correct performance of sacrificial rit...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33427,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sabbath","title_en":"Sabbath","content_ro":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\nDerivation 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>\nIn the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nSignificantly, 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 Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed 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>\nThere 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, 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>\nThe 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, 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 Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nObserving 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>\nReturning 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>\nThe 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>\nHemmed 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>\nThe 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>\nAs 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>\nWhen the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 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>\nIn the New Testament<\/p>\nPrior 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>\nJesus 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>\nHis 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, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nRabbinic 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>\nMore 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>\nJesus, 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>\nLiving 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>\nFinally, 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>\nGod 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>\nSee also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\nDerivation 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>\nIn the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nThe 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>\nSignificantly, 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 Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed 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>\nThere 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, 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>\nThe 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, 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 Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nObserving 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>\nReturning 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>\nThe 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>\nHemmed 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>\nThe 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>\nAs 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>\nWhen the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 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>\nIn the New Testament<\/p>\nPrior 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>\nJesus 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>\nHis 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, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nRabbinic 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>\nMore 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>\nJesus, 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>\nLiving 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>\nFinally, 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>\nGod 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>\nSee 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}],"20":[{"id":12720,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Forgiveness","title_en":"Forgiveness","content_ro":"<h3>FORGIVENESS<\/h3>\nPardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian doctrine.<\/p>\nIn other religions, forgiveness does not have the same force. In animism, there is no awareness of a personal relationship with God. In Hinduism, all have to pay the inexorable consequences of karma in the wheel of reincarnations. Buddhism likewise knows nothing of a forgiving God. The idea is present in Islam, but there is no personal God and Father. Even in Judaism, forgiveness remains a limited experience, though forgiveness as developed in the NT adds dimension to the teaching of the OT.<\/p>\nExpressions of Forgiveness in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe idea of forgiveness is expressed in various metaphors. The command is nasa<\/span>,<\/em> to “send away,” as the scapegoat was sent away into the wilderness to bear the sins of the Israelites. It is also rendered “to be merciful” (Lv 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:30, 34; Pss 86:5; 103:3). The Hebrew word kapar<\/span> is commonly used of atonement, meaning “to cover up,” as the sacrifice was offered to cover the deficiency of the worshiper (Ex 29:36; Dt 21:8; Jer 18:23; Ez 43:20; 45:20). Cognates of salah<\/span> always refer to God’s act of forgiveness (Nm 30:5, 8, 12; Pss 86:5; 130:4; Dn 9:9). God lets go of the transgression; he removes it. Another expression is maha<\/span>,<\/em> to “wipe away” (Ps 51:1, 7; Is 43:25; 44:22).<\/p>\nThe OT teaches that God is a forgiving God (Ex 34:6-7; Neh 9:17; Dn 9:9), yet he is just and punishes sin. Many incidents are also given where God refuses to forgive when the proper conditions are not met, or when certain serious offenses are committed (Dt 29:20; 2 Kgs 24:4; Jer 5:7). Forgiveness is rooted in the character of God, but his forgiveness is never indiscriminate, for people must also be penitent. The OT (cited here in the rsv<\/span>) uses vivid imagery to indicate the magnitude of God’s forgiveness. Sin is cast “into the depths of the sea” (Mi 7:19), removed “as far as the east is from the west” (Ps 103:12), hid behind God’s back (Is 38:17), “remembered no more” (Jer 31:34). The stain and soil of sin is bleached white (Is 1:18). Sin, which burdens like a weight, is forever lifted and remitted.<\/p>\nThe dynamic of forgiveness in the OT is thus releasing one from the past. The past acts and deeds of sin are not denied, but there is no longer any bondage. Forgiveness brings freedom.<\/p>\nForgiveness in the New Testament<\/p>\nIn the NT, the concept of the unmerited forgiveness of God is intensified by the fact that God forgave our sins when Christ died for us. Each human is an insolvent debtor (Mt 18:23-35) who has no hope of repayment. Sinners all, we cannot keep the law or save ourselves (Mk 10:26-27). This highlights the NT teaching that it is in the person of Christ himself that there is forgiveness. He alone has the power to forgive sins (2:5-10). It is his death that is redemptive (Mt 26:28; Mk 10:45) and his blood that is the basis of a new covenant (1 Cor 11:25). It is through him that one can enter into the living experience of forgiveness (Heb 9:15, 22). So forgiveness is inseparable from the proclamation of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:38; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1 Jn 2:12).<\/p>\n\nThere are other distinctively NT concepts of forgiveness. The Greek word charizomai<\/span>,<\/em> meaning “to forgive sins,” is distinctively developed by Paul in terms of God’s gracious pardon (2 Cor 2:7; 12:13; Eph 4:32; Col 2:13; 3:13). Sin is considered as a debt, and aphesis<\/span> denotes the discharge of a debt (“putting it away”—see Lk 6:37). Forgiveness is also treated as remission, paresis<\/span> (“passing over”). God has not executed the full retribution called for by sin (Acts 14:16; 17:30); instead, he has shown mercy.<\/p>\nYet the NT speaks of two limitations to forgiveness. One is the unpardonable sin (Mt 12:31-32; Mk 3:28-30; Lk 12:10). In this regard Christ speaks of those who, like the Pharisees, are so warped in their moral judgments that they cannot distinguish between acts of Satan and the good deeds of Christ. There is also “the sin against the Holy Spirit” that is “sin unto death” (1 Jn 5:16). This sin is not specifically defined, but its essence seems to be consistent rejection of the grace of God.<\/p>\nThe ethics of forgiveness in the NT insists not only on penitence as a condition for forgiveness (2 Cor 7:10), but also on the need to forgive others (Mt 6:14-15). If in the midst of receiving forgiveness one does not forgive others, it is a clear sign that repentance is not complete. Several times in his parables the Lord insists that the readiness to forgive others is a sign of true repentance (Mt 18:23-35; Lk 6:37). So Christ taught that to forgive is a duty, and no limits can be set on it. It must be granted without reserve, even to 70 times 7 (Mt 18:21-22). Forgiveness is part of the mutual relationship of believers: since all are dependent upon God’s forgiveness, all are required to forgive one another. “As the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive” (Col 3:13).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Confession; Repentance.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FORGIVENESS<\/h3>\nPardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian doctrine.<\/p>\nIn other religions, forgiveness does not have the same force. In animism, there is no awareness of a personal relationship with God. In Hinduism, all have to pay the inexorable consequences of karma in the wheel of reincarnations. Buddhism likewise knows nothing of a forgiving God. The idea is present in Islam, but there is no personal God and Father. Even in Judaism, forgiveness remains a limited experience, though forgiveness as developed in the NT adds dimension to the teaching of the OT.<\/p>\nExpressions of Forgiveness in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe idea of forgiveness is expressed in various metaphors. The command is nasa<\/span>,<\/em> to “send away,” as the scapegoat was sent away into the wilderness to bear the sins of the Israelites. It is also rendered “to be merciful” (Lv 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:30, 34; Pss 86:5; 103:3). The Hebrew word kapar<\/span> is commonly used of atonement, meaning “to cover up,” as the sacrifice was offered to cover the deficiency of the worshiper (Ex 29:36; Dt 21:8; Jer 18:23; Ez 43:20; 45:20). Cognates of salah<\/span> always refer to God’s act of forgiveness (Nm 30:5, 8, 12; Pss 86:5; 130:4; Dn 9:9). God lets go of the transgression; he removes it. Another expression is maha<\/span>,<\/em> to “wipe away” (Ps 51:1, 7; Is 43:25; 44:22).<\/p>\nThe OT teaches that God is a forgiving God (Ex 34:6-7; Neh 9:17; Dn 9:9), yet he is just and punishes sin. Many incidents are also given where God refuses to forgive when the proper conditions are not met, or when certain serious offenses are committed (Dt 29:20; 2 Kgs 24:4; Jer 5:7). Forgiveness is rooted in the character of God, but his forgiveness is never indiscriminate, for people must also be penitent. The OT (cited here in the rsv<\/span>) uses vivid imagery to indicate the magnitude of God’s forgiveness. Sin is cast “into the depths of the sea” (Mi 7:19), removed “as far as the east is from the west” (Ps 103:12), hid behind God’s back (Is 38:17), “remembered no more” (Jer 31:34). The stain and soil of sin is bleached white (Is 1:18). Sin, which burdens like a weight, is forever lifted and remitted.<\/p>\nThe dynamic of forgiveness in the OT is thus releasing one from the past. The past acts and deeds of sin are not denied, but there is no longer any bondage. Forgiveness brings freedom.<\/p>\nForgiveness in the New Testament<\/p>\nIn the NT, the concept of the unmerited forgiveness of God is intensified by the fact that God forgave our sins when Christ died for us. Each human is an insolvent debtor (Mt 18:23-35) who has no hope of repayment. Sinners all, we cannot keep the law or save ourselves (Mk 10:26-27). This highlights the NT teaching that it is in the person of Christ himself that there is forgiveness. He alone has the power to forgive sins (2:5-10). It is his death that is redemptive (Mt 26:28; Mk 10:45) and his blood that is the basis of a new covenant (1 Cor 11:25). It is through him that one can enter into the living experience of forgiveness (Heb 9:15, 22). So forgiveness is inseparable from the proclamation of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:38; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1 Jn 2:12).<\/p>\n\nThere are other distinctively NT concepts of forgiveness. The Greek word charizomai<\/span>,<\/em> meaning “to forgive sins,” is distinctively developed by Paul in terms of God’s gracious pardon (2 Cor 2:7; 12:13; Eph 4:32; Col 2:13; 3:13). Sin is considered as a debt, and aphesis<\/span> denotes the discharge of a debt (“putting it away”—see Lk 6:37). Forgiveness is also treated as remission, paresis<\/span> (“passing over”). God has not executed the full retribution called for by sin (Acts 14:16; 17:30); instead, he has shown mercy.<\/p>\nYet the NT speaks of two limitations to forgiveness. One is the unpardonable sin (Mt 12:31-32; Mk 3:28-30; Lk 12:10). In this regard Christ speaks of those who, like the Pharisees, are so warped in their moral judgments that they cannot distinguish between acts of Satan and the good deeds of Christ. There is also “the sin against the Holy Spirit” that is “sin unto death” (1 Jn 5:16). This sin is not specifically defined, but its essence seems to be consistent rejection of the grace of God.<\/p>\nThe ethics of forgiveness in the NT insists not only on penitence as a condition for forgiveness (2 Cor 7:10), but also on the need to forgive others (Mt 6:14-15). If in the midst of receiving forgiveness one does not forgive others, it is a clear sign that repentance is not complete. Several times in his parables the Lord insists that the readiness to forgive others is a sign of true repentance (Mt 18:23-35; Lk 6:37). So Christ taught that to forgive is a duty, and no limits can be set on it. It must be granted without reserve, even to 70 times 7 (Mt 18:21-22). Forgiveness is part of the mutual relationship of believers: since all are dependent upon God’s forgiveness, all are required to forgive one another. “As the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive” (Col 3:13).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Confession; Repentance.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FORGIVENESS Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian...","summary_en":"FORGIVENESS Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":53385,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:21","content_ro":"45:21-25<\/strong> Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover<\/em> feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly higher than those prescribed in Num 28. The Festival of Shelters<\/em>,<\/em> however, is not even explicitly named in the Hebrew text and has lost anything distinctive about its celebration except for the provision that the prince will provide<\/em> the same sacrifices<\/em> as for the Passover. It still occurs in the seventh month. The land’s constant purification from sin emerges as a central theme.<\/p>","content_en":"45:21-25<\/strong> Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover<\/em> feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly higher than those prescribed in Num 28. The Festival of Shelters<\/em>,<\/em> however, is not even explicitly named in the Hebrew text and has lost anything distinctive about its celebration except for the provision that the prince will provide<\/em> the same sacrifices<\/em> as for the Passover. It still occurs in the seventh month. The land’s constant purification from sin emerges as a central theme.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:21-25 Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly hi...","summary_en":"45:21-25 Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly hi...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":81011,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:21","content_ro":"45:21-25<\/strong> Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover<\/em> feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly higher than those prescribed in Num 28. The Festival of Shelters<\/em>,<\/em> however, is not even explicitly named in the Hebrew text and has lost anything distinctive about its celebration except for the provision that the prince will provide<\/em> the same sacrifices<\/em> as for the Passover. It still occurs in the seventh month. The land’s constant purification from sin emerges as a central theme.<\/p>","content_en":"45:21-25<\/strong> Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover<\/em> feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly higher than those prescribed in Num 28. The Festival of Shelters<\/em>,<\/em> however, is not even explicitly named in the Hebrew text and has lost anything distinctive about its celebration except for the provision that the prince will provide<\/em> the same sacrifices<\/em> as for the Passover. It still occurs in the seventh month. The land’s constant purification from sin emerges as a central theme.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:21-25 Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly hi...","summary_en":"45:21-25 Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly hi...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108637,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:21","content_ro":"45:21-25<\/strong> Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover<\/em> feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly higher than those prescribed in Num 28. The Festival of Shelters<\/em>,<\/em> however, is not even explicitly named in the Hebrew text and has lost anything distinctive about its celebration except for the provision that the prince will provide<\/em> the same sacrifices<\/em> as for the Passover. It still occurs in the seventh month. The land’s constant purification from sin emerges as a central theme.<\/p>","content_en":"45:21-25<\/strong> Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover<\/em> feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly higher than those prescribed in Num 28. The Festival of Shelters<\/em>,<\/em> however, is not even explicitly named in the Hebrew text and has lost anything distinctive about its celebration except for the provision that the prince will provide<\/em> the same sacrifices<\/em> as for the Passover. It still occurs in the seventh month. The land’s constant purification from sin emerges as a central theme.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:21-25 Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly hi...","summary_en":"45:21-25 Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly hi...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":136263,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ezechiel 45:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ezechiel 45:21","content_ro":"45:21-25<\/strong> Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover<\/em> feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly higher than those prescribed in Num 28. The Festival of Shelters<\/em>,<\/em> however, is not even explicitly named in the Hebrew text and has lost anything distinctive about its celebration except for the provision that the prince will provide<\/em> the same sacrifices<\/em> as for the Passover. It still occurs in the seventh month. The land’s constant purification from sin emerges as a central theme.<\/p>","content_en":"45:21-25<\/strong> Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover<\/em> feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly higher than those prescribed in Num 28. The Festival of Shelters<\/em>,<\/em> however, is not even explicitly named in the Hebrew text and has lost anything distinctive about its celebration except for the provision that the prince will provide<\/em> the same sacrifices<\/em> as for the Passover. It still occurs in the seventh month. The land’s constant purification from sin emerges as a central theme.<\/p>","summary_ro":"45:21-25 Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly hi...","summary_en":"45:21-25 Like the offerings, the annual festivals in the new Temple had a purifying purpose. Instead of the three distinctive festivals of the Mosaic order (the feasts of Passover, Harvest, and Shelters), there were now only two virtually identical festivals, Passover and Shelters, spaced six months apart. The Passover feast still took place on the fourteenth day of the first month and resembled the earlier festival in many ways, though the number of sacrificial offerings was significantly hi...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66101,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\nAt the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\nHowever, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\nJesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\nAt the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\nHowever, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\nJesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93727,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\nAt the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\nHowever, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\nJesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\nAt the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\nHowever, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\nJesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121353,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\nAt the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\nHowever, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\nJesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\nAt the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\nHowever, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\nJesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148979,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Cross and Passover","title_en":"The Cross and Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\nAt the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\nHowever, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\nJesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Cross and Passover<\/h3>\nAt the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin.<\/p>\nHowever, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death marks the central event of the Passover season (see Exod 12:43-47; Luke 22:7; 1 Cor 5:7). In the first century, Jews made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem each spring to celebrate the Passover and to reread the story of the Exodus (see Exod 12–15). When Israel was being rescued from Egypt, the blood of a lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of each Jewish home in Egypt, an act which saved those inside from death (Exod 12). Jews who came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover needed to supply a perfect young lamb for sacrifice (the animal could not be diseased or have broken bones).<\/p>\nJesus used his final Passover meal to show that his sacrificial death would give new meaning to the festival (Mark 14:17-25). At his crucifixion, Jesus’ legs were not broken, as was often done to fulfill a Passover rule (John 19:31-33; see Exod 12:46). Blood ran freely from his wound (John 19:34), showing that his life was being exchanged for others. Just as a lamb died to save the lives of Jewish families at the Passover in Egypt, so too, the death of the Son of God on the cross serves to bring salvation to the world.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 12:1–13:16; 29:38-46; Num 9:1-14; Deut 16:1-8; 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 30:1-27; Ezra 6:19-21; Isa 53:7; Ezek 45:21-22; Matt 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:17-31; Luke 22:14-30; John 1:29, 36; John 19:17-36; Acts 8:32-35; 12:3-4; 1 Cor 5:7-8; Heb 11:28; Rev 5:5-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","summary_en":"The Cross and Passover At the beginning of John’s Gospel, John the Baptist introduced Jesus by calling him the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29, 36). This phrase might be a reference to the sacrificial lamb that was killed daily in the Temple (Exod 29:38-46) or to the sacrificial lamb of Isaiah 53:7 (cp. Acts 8:32-35; Rev 5:5-14). Both of these sacrifices spoke of rescue and forgiveness from sin. However, this was not all that John had in mind. John presented Jesus as the Passover lamb whose death ma...","source":"ThemeNotes.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"}}

Ezechiel 45

Citește Biblia

Ezechiel 45

Niciun rezultat

Redare audio

Bine ai venit! 👋