📖 Biblia online

Citește Biblia

Biblia audio Planuri audio structurate — ascultă Biblia zilnică

Ieremia 31

¹ ,,În vremea aceea, zice Domnul, Eu voi fi Dumnezeul tuturor seminţiilor lui Israel, şi ei vor fi poporul meu.``

² Aşa vorbeşte Domnul: ,,Poporul celor ce-au scăpat de sabie, a căpătat trecere în pustie: Israel merge spre locul lui de odihnă.``

³ ,,Domnul mi Se arată de departe: ,Te iubesc cu o iubire vecinică; deaceea îţi păstrez bunătatea Mea!

⁴ Te voi aşeza din nou, şi vei fi aşezată din nou, fecioara lui Israel! Te vei împodobi iarăş cu timpanele tale, şi vei ieşi în mijlocul jocurilor voioase.

⁵ Vei sădi iarăş vii pe înălţimile Samariei; ceice le vor sădi, le vor culege şi roadele.

⁶ Căci vine ziua, când străjerii vor striga pe muntele lui Efraim: ,Sculaţi-vă, să ne suim în Sion, la Domnul, Dumnezeul nostru!

⁷ Căci aşa vorbeşte Domnul: ,Strigaţi de bucurie asupra lui Iacov, chiuiţi de veselie în fruntea neamurilor! Înălţaţi-vă glasurile, cântaţi laude, şi ziceţi: ,Doamne, izbăveşte pe poporul Tău, pe rămăşiţa lui Israel!``

⁸ ,,Iată, îi aduc înapoi din ţara dela miazănoapte, îi adun dela marginile pământului: între ei este şi orbul şi şchiopul, femeia însărcinată şi cea în durerile naşterii; o mare mulţime se întoarce înapoi aici!

⁹ Plângând vin, şi îi duc în mijlocul rugăciunilor lor; îi duc la râuri de apă, pe un drum neted pe care nu se poticnesc. Căci Eu sânt Tatăl lui Israel, şi Efraim este întâiul Meu născut.

¹⁰ ,,Ascultaţi Cuvântul Domnului, neamuri, şi vestiţi-l în ostroave depărtate! Spuneţi: ,Celce a risipit pe Israel îl va aduna, şi-l va păzi cum îşi păzeşte păstorul turma.

¹¹ Căci Domnul răscumpără pe Iacov, şi-l izbăveşte din mâna unuia mai tare decât el.

¹² Ei vor veni, şi vor chiui de bucurie pe înălţimile Sionului; vor alerga la bunătăţile Domnului, la grâu, la must, la untuldelemn, la oi şi boi, sufletul le va fi ca o grădină bine udată, şi nu vor mai tânji.

¹³ Atunci fetele se vor veseli la joc, tinerii şi bătrânii se vor bucura şi ei; le voi preface jalea în veselie, şi-i voi mângâia, le voi da bucurie, după necazurile lor.

¹⁴ Voi sătura de grăsime sufletul preoţilor, şi poporul Meu se va sătura de bunătăţile Mele, zice Domnul.``

¹⁵ ,,Aşa vorbeşte Domnul: Un ţipăt se aude la Rama, plângeri şi lacrămi amare: Rahela îşi plânge copiii; şi nu vrea să se mângâie pentru copiii ei, căci nu mai sânt!``

¹⁶ ,,Aşa vorbeşte Domnul: ,Opreşte-ţi plânsul, opreşte-ţi lacrămile din ochi; căci truda îţi va fi răsplătită, zice Domnul; ei se vor întoarce iarăş din ţara vrăjmaşului.

¹⁷ Este nădejde pentru urmaşii tăi, zice Domnul; copiii tăi se vor întoarce în ţinutul lor!`

¹⁸ Aud pe Efraim bocindu-se: ,M-ai pedepsit, şi am fost pedepsit, ca un junc nedeprins la jug; întoarce-mă Tu, şi mă voi întoarce, căci Tu eşti Domnul, Dumnezeul meu!

¹⁹ După ce m-am întors, m-am căit; şi după ce mi-am recunoscut greşelele, mă bat pe pulpă; sânt ruşinat şi roş de ruşine, căci port ocara tinereţei mele.` -

²⁰ ,Îmi este Efraim un fiu scump, un copil iubit de Mine?` ,Căci când vorbesc de el, Îmi aduc aminte cu gingăşie de el, de aceea Îmi arde inima în Mine pentru el, şi voi avea milă negreşit de el, zice Domnul. -

²¹ ,Ridică semne pe drum, pune stâlpi, ia seama la calea, la drumul pe care l-ai urmat... Întoarce-te, fecioara lui Israel, întoarce-te în cetăţile acestea cari sânt ale tale!

²² Până când vei fi pribeagă, fiică rătăcită? Căci Domnul face un lucru nou pe pământ: femeia va peţi pe bărbat.

²³ ,,Aşa vorbeşte Domnul oştirilor, Dumnezeul lui Israel: ,Iată ce se va zice iarăş în ţara lui Iuda şi în cetăţile sale, când voi aduce înapoi pe prinşii lor de război: ,Domnul să te binecuvinteze, locaş al neprihănirii, munte sfânt!`

²⁴ Iuda va locui acolo fără teamă în toate cetăţile lui, plugarii şi cei ce umblă cu turmele la păşune.

²⁵ Căci voi răcori sufletul însetat, şi voi sătura orice suflet lihnit de foame.` -

²⁶ La aceste lucruri m-am trezit, şi am privit; şi somnul îmi fusese dulce. -

²⁷ ,Iată, vin zile, zice Domnul, când voi însămânţa casa lui Israel şi casa lui Iuda cu o sămânţă de oameni şi o sămânţă de dobitoace.

²⁸ Şi cum am vegheat asupra lor ca să-i smulg, să-i tai, să-i dărâm, să-i nimicesc şi să le fac rău, tot aşa voi veghea asupra lor că să-i zidesc şi să-i sădesc, zice Domnul.``

²⁹ ,,În zilele acelea, nu se va mai zice: ,Părinţii au mâncat aguridă, şi copiilor li s-au sterpezit dinţii,`

³⁰ ci fiecare va muri pentru nelegiuirea lui; oricărui om, care va mânca aguridă, i se vor sterpezi dinţii!

³¹ ,,Iată, vin zile, zice Domnul, când voi face cu casa lui Israel şi cu casa lui Iuda un legământ nou.

³² Nu ca legământul, pe care l-am încheiat cu părinţii lor, în ziua când i-am apucat de mână, să-i scot din ţara Egiptului, legământ, pe care l-au călcat, măcarcă aveam drepturi de soţ asupra lor, zice Domnul.``

³³ ,,Ci iată legământul, pe care-l voi face cu casa lui Israel, după zilele acelea, zice Domnul: Voi pune Legea Mea înlăuntrul lor, o voi scrie în inima lor; şi Eu voi fi Dumnezeul lor, iar ei vor fi poporul Meu.

³⁴ Niciunul nu va mai învăţa pe aproapele, sau pe fratele său, zicând: ,Cunoaşte pe Domnul!` Ci toţi Mă vor cunoaşte, dela cel mai mic până la cel mai mare, zice Domnul; căci le voi ierta nelegiuirea, şi nu-Mi voi mai aduce aminte de păcatul lor.

³⁵ ,,Aşa vorbeşte Domnul, care a făcut soarele să lumineze ziua, care a rânduit luna şi stelele să lumineze noaptea, care întărâtă marea şi face valurile ei să urle, El, al cărui Nume este Domnul oştirilor:

³⁶ Dacă vor înceta aceste legi dinaintea Mea, zice Domnul, şi neamul lui Israel va înceta pe vecie să mai fie un neam înaintea Mea!``

³⁷ ,,Aşa vorbeşte Domnul: ,Dacă cerurile sus pot fi măsurate, şi dacă temeliile pământului jos pot fi cercetate, atunci voi lepăda şi Eu pe tot neamul lui Israel, pentru tot ce a făcut, zice Domnul.``

³⁸ ,,Iată, vin zile, zice Domnul, când cetatea va fi zidită iarăş în cinstea Domnului, dela turnul lui Hananeel până la poarta unghiului.

³⁹ Frânghia de măsurat va trece încă pe dinaintea ei, până la dealul Gareb, şi de acolo va face un ocol în spre Goat.

⁴⁰ Toată valea unde se aruncă trupurile moarte şi cenuşa, şi toate ogoarele până la pârâul Chedron, până la unghiul porţii cailor la răsărit, vor fi închinate Domnului şi nu vor mai fi niciodată nici surpate nici nimicite.``

{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":19650,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\nBecause of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Teachings about God<\/p>\n• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\nTeachings about God<\/p>\nAnyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\nOne of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\nThe father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\nAlthough there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\nIn the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\nTeachings about Himself<\/p>\nWhat Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\nJesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\nThe title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\nThe Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\nThe term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\nAnother title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\nMany similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\nTeachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\nNo one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\nThe main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\nThere is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\nYet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\nThat the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\nIt is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\nThe clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\nVarious features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\nThere is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\nTeachings about His Own Death<\/p>\nThe announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\nIt is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\nThis emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\nThe Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\nJesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\nAnother aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\nTeachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\nAt several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\nWhen Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\nWhile warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\nAfter the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\nIn John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\nOn the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\nThe indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\nAnother important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\nTeachings about Humanity<\/p>\nJesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\nJesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\nThe relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\nJesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\nJesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\nJesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\nUndoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\nIn the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\nThere is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\nTeachings about the Church<\/p>\nSome have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\nIn addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\nAlthough there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\nJesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\nTeachings about the Future<\/p>\nJesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\nHe told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\nJesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\nAnother important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\nThe theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\nAmong Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\nTeachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\nMuch of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\nJesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\nConclusion<\/p>\nNo account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\nMany have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\nIt is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\nThere is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\nThere are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\nTo what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\nBecause of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Teachings about God<\/p>\n• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\nTeachings about God<\/p>\nAnyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\nOne of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\nThe father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\nAlthough there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\nIn the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\nTeachings about Himself<\/p>\nWhat Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\nJesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\nThe title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\nThe Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\nThe term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\nAnother title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\nMany similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\nTeachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\nNo one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\nThe main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\nThere is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\nYet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\nThat the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\nIt is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\nThe clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\nVarious features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\nThere is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\nTeachings about His Own Death<\/p>\nThe announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\nIt is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\nThis emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\nThe Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\nJesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\nAnother aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\nTeachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\nAt several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\nWhen Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\nWhile warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\nThe Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\nAfter the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\nIn John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\nOn the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\nThe indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\nAnother important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\nTeachings about Humanity<\/p>\nJesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\nJesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\nThe relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\nJesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\nJesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\nJesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\nUndoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\nIn the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\nThere is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\nTeachings about the Church<\/p>\nSome have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\nIn addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\nAlthough there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\nJesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\nTeachings about the Future<\/p>\nJesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\nHe told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\nJesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\nAnother important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\nThe theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\nAmong Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\nTeachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\nMuch of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\nJesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\nConclusion<\/p>\nNo account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\nMany have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\nIt is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\nThere is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\nThere are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\nTo what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31441,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Promise","title_en":"Promise","content_ro":"<h3>PROMISE<\/h3>\nDeclaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified.<\/p>\nTypes of Promise<\/p>\nIn biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who gives them is totally able to perform that which he has promised (Rom 4:21).<\/p>\nDivine promises in Scripture assure their recipients of many spiritual and temporal benefits, including sonship (2 Cor 6:16–7:1), forgiveness of sin (1 Jn 1:9), answer to prayer (Lk 11:9), deliverance from temptations (1 Cor 10:13), sustaining grace for difficult times (2 Cor 12:9), provision for all needs (Phil 4:19), reward for obedience (Jas 1:12), and eternal life (Lk 18:29-30; Jn 3:16; Rom 6:22-23). God’s promises are certain and sure, but participation in their blessing often requires that certain conditions on which they are predicated be met. Divine promises also are not always guarantees of blessing. Indeed, there are promises announcing the certainty of judgment on those who refuse to obey the gospel of the Lord Jesus (2 Thes 1:8-9).<\/p>\nIn addition to the promises of God, which have subjective and individual application to many different people in widely different times and places, there are a great many promises that pertain to the programmatic unfolding of God’s plan of redemption in a grand procession of historical events. These promises have neither repeated applications nor conditional natures. In such cases, promise becomes nearly synonymous with prophecy, and promises of this type, along with their subsequent fulfillment, are intricately intertwined in the entire fabric of redemptive history.<\/p>\nPromises in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe highlights of the promise theme in the OT can be seen in the promise of what is often termed the protevangelium (i.e., the first announcement of the gospel) given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden immediately after the fall into sin (Gn 3:15). Subsequent promises are the covenants God made with Abraham (chs 12; 15; 17) and with David (2 Sm 7), followed by the promise of a new covenant (Jer 31).<\/p>\n<h5>The Protevangelium<\/h5>\nGenesis 3:15b says: “Your [Satan’s] offspring and her [Eve’s] offspring will be enemies. He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel” (nlt<\/span>). This statement is a promise that at some future time the offspring of the woman will crush Satan. The offspring of the woman is individualized in the “he” of the last phrase. “He” shall strike you (i.e., Satan) on the head, although Satan will inflict a wound on the offspring of the woman. Here, then, is the promise that gives Adam and Eve, as well as their descendants, the basis to expect the eventual destruction of their adversary Satan through their offspring.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to Abraham<\/h5>\nIn Genesis 12:1-7 Abraham is told to leave his people and country and to go to a land that the Lord would show to him. God, in turn, promises him that (1) his offspring would become a great nation; (2) he would be blessed and his name made great; (3) through him other nations would be blessed; and (4) the land of Canaan would be given to his descendants. Of particular significance among these promises given to Abraham is that through his offspring he will bless many nations. This promise is repeated five times in the book of Genesis (Gn 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14) and points back to the promise of Genesis 3:15 as well as forward to Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to David<\/h5>\nIn 2 Samuel 7, God gave a promise to King David that his dynasty would endure forever (2 Sm 7:16; Ps 89:34-37). It is with this Davidic covenant that the promised line, which had previously run from Adam through Seth, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Judah, is now narrowed to the royal line of the house of David. David is to be the ancestor of the Messiah-King to come (Ps 89:3, 27-37). David thus became a central figure in the history of God’s plan to redeem the world. Jesus Christ is referred to as the son of David, the son of Abraham (Mt 1:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise of a New Covenant<\/h5>\nIn Jeremiah 31:31-37, it is promised that in future days the Lord would make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. The content of this new covenant reemphasizes and extends the basic promises of the former covenant: “I will be their God, and they will be my people. . . . I will forgive their wickedness and will never again remember their sins” (vv 33-34, nlt<\/span>). It would appear that the “new covenant” of Jeremiah is to be viewed as a restatement of the same basic promises included in the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants.<\/p>\nThe new covenant was inaugurated with the first advent of Christ, and believers in Christ are now recipients by the Holy Spirit of the blessings of that new covenant (Heb 8:6-13). The complete and final realization of these blessings in all their fullness awaits the return of Christ, the complete establishment of his kingdom in its outward and final form, and the blessedness of life in the new heavens and new earth. In the intervening time, God’s people live in a day in which some of the benefits of the age to come are a present reality but the fullness of the new age is yet future.<\/p>\nThe Promise Theme in the New Testament<\/p>\nNew Testament writers refer to the OT promises in a way that indicates that they did not view these promises as separate and isolated assertions but rather as portions of a unitary promise that is ultimately fulfilled in Christ (see Lk 1:54-55, 69-73; Acts 13:23, 32-33; 26:6-7; 2 Cor 1:20). Jesus is the fulfillment of the promises made to the patriarchs and David, and these promises are accordingly to be viewed as having a single focal point in him.<\/p>\nIn the books of Galatians and Ephesians, Paul develops this idea in more detail, saying to the Gentile Christians that they are made “heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Eph 3:6, niv<\/span>). In fact, Paul says that Gentiles who trust in Christ are incorporated into the seed of Abraham and are thus heirs according to the promise (Gal 3:29), and he even goes so far as to equate the gospel with the promise given to Abraham when he states, “The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: ‘All nations will be blessed through you’ ” (Gal 3:8, niv<\/span>). These and other NT texts establish the close connection between the coming of Christ and the fulfillment of the promise. The promises of God find their point of convergence in Christ and all that he accomplished, and will yet accomplish, for his people.<\/p>\nOne further aspect of the promise particularly emphasized in the NT concerns the coming of the Holy Spirit. Paul refers to believers as sealed with the promised Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13), and as receiving the promise of the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The gift of the Holy Spirit is not only the fulfillment of an OT promise (Is 32:15; Ez 36:27; Jl 2:28), and that of Christ himself (Lk 24:49; Jn 14:16, 20; Acts 1:4), but it is also itself a promise of something yet future. Paul speaks of the Holy Spirit’s presence within the believer as a guarantee of our inheritance (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14). The Holy Spirit is the “firstfruit” of future glory (Rom 8:23).<\/p>\nOne final aspect of the promise theme in the NT concerns the assurance of Christ’s second advent and the establishment of the new heavens and the new earth (cf. Jn 14:1-3; 2 Pt 3:4, 9, 13).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Covenant; God, Being and Attributes of; Hope; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROMISE<\/h3>\nDeclaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified.<\/p>\nTypes of Promise<\/p>\nIn biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who gives them is totally able to perform that which he has promised (Rom 4:21).<\/p>\nDivine promises in Scripture assure their recipients of many spiritual and temporal benefits, including sonship (2 Cor 6:16–7:1), forgiveness of sin (1 Jn 1:9), answer to prayer (Lk 11:9), deliverance from temptations (1 Cor 10:13), sustaining grace for difficult times (2 Cor 12:9), provision for all needs (Phil 4:19), reward for obedience (Jas 1:12), and eternal life (Lk 18:29-30; Jn 3:16; Rom 6:22-23). God’s promises are certain and sure, but participation in their blessing often requires that certain conditions on which they are predicated be met. Divine promises also are not always guarantees of blessing. Indeed, there are promises announcing the certainty of judgment on those who refuse to obey the gospel of the Lord Jesus (2 Thes 1:8-9).<\/p>\nIn addition to the promises of God, which have subjective and individual application to many different people in widely different times and places, there are a great many promises that pertain to the programmatic unfolding of God’s plan of redemption in a grand procession of historical events. These promises have neither repeated applications nor conditional natures. In such cases, promise becomes nearly synonymous with prophecy, and promises of this type, along with their subsequent fulfillment, are intricately intertwined in the entire fabric of redemptive history.<\/p>\nPromises in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe highlights of the promise theme in the OT can be seen in the promise of what is often termed the protevangelium (i.e., the first announcement of the gospel) given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden immediately after the fall into sin (Gn 3:15). Subsequent promises are the covenants God made with Abraham (chs 12; 15; 17) and with David (2 Sm 7), followed by the promise of a new covenant (Jer 31).<\/p>\n<h5>The Protevangelium<\/h5>\nGenesis 3:15b says: “Your [Satan’s] offspring and her [Eve’s] offspring will be enemies. He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel” (nlt<\/span>). This statement is a promise that at some future time the offspring of the woman will crush Satan. The offspring of the woman is individualized in the “he” of the last phrase. “He” shall strike you (i.e., Satan) on the head, although Satan will inflict a wound on the offspring of the woman. Here, then, is the promise that gives Adam and Eve, as well as their descendants, the basis to expect the eventual destruction of their adversary Satan through their offspring.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to Abraham<\/h5>\nIn Genesis 12:1-7 Abraham is told to leave his people and country and to go to a land that the Lord would show to him. God, in turn, promises him that (1) his offspring would become a great nation; (2) he would be blessed and his name made great; (3) through him other nations would be blessed; and (4) the land of Canaan would be given to his descendants. Of particular significance among these promises given to Abraham is that through his offspring he will bless many nations. This promise is repeated five times in the book of Genesis (Gn 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14) and points back to the promise of Genesis 3:15 as well as forward to Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to David<\/h5>\nIn 2 Samuel 7, God gave a promise to King David that his dynasty would endure forever (2 Sm 7:16; Ps 89:34-37). It is with this Davidic covenant that the promised line, which had previously run from Adam through Seth, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Judah, is now narrowed to the royal line of the house of David. David is to be the ancestor of the Messiah-King to come (Ps 89:3, 27-37). David thus became a central figure in the history of God’s plan to redeem the world. Jesus Christ is referred to as the son of David, the son of Abraham (Mt 1:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise of a New Covenant<\/h5>\nIn Jeremiah 31:31-37, it is promised that in future days the Lord would make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. The content of this new covenant reemphasizes and extends the basic promises of the former covenant: “I will be their God, and they will be my people. . . . I will forgive their wickedness and will never again remember their sins” (vv 33-34, nlt<\/span>). It would appear that the “new covenant” of Jeremiah is to be viewed as a restatement of the same basic promises included in the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants.<\/p>\nThe new covenant was inaugurated with the first advent of Christ, and believers in Christ are now recipients by the Holy Spirit of the blessings of that new covenant (Heb 8:6-13). The complete and final realization of these blessings in all their fullness awaits the return of Christ, the complete establishment of his kingdom in its outward and final form, and the blessedness of life in the new heavens and new earth. In the intervening time, God’s people live in a day in which some of the benefits of the age to come are a present reality but the fullness of the new age is yet future.<\/p>\nThe Promise Theme in the New Testament<\/p>\nNew Testament writers refer to the OT promises in a way that indicates that they did not view these promises as separate and isolated assertions but rather as portions of a unitary promise that is ultimately fulfilled in Christ (see Lk 1:54-55, 69-73; Acts 13:23, 32-33; 26:6-7; 2 Cor 1:20). Jesus is the fulfillment of the promises made to the patriarchs and David, and these promises are accordingly to be viewed as having a single focal point in him.<\/p>\nIn the books of Galatians and Ephesians, Paul develops this idea in more detail, saying to the Gentile Christians that they are made “heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Eph 3:6, niv<\/span>). In fact, Paul says that Gentiles who trust in Christ are incorporated into the seed of Abraham and are thus heirs according to the promise (Gal 3:29), and he even goes so far as to equate the gospel with the promise given to Abraham when he states, “The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: ‘All nations will be blessed through you’ ” (Gal 3:8, niv<\/span>). These and other NT texts establish the close connection between the coming of Christ and the fulfillment of the promise. The promises of God find their point of convergence in Christ and all that he accomplished, and will yet accomplish, for his people.<\/p>\nOne further aspect of the promise particularly emphasized in the NT concerns the coming of the Holy Spirit. Paul refers to believers as sealed with the promised Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13), and as receiving the promise of the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The gift of the Holy Spirit is not only the fulfillment of an OT promise (Is 32:15; Ez 36:27; Jl 2:28), and that of Christ himself (Lk 24:49; Jn 14:16, 20; Acts 1:4), but it is also itself a promise of something yet future. Paul speaks of the Holy Spirit’s presence within the believer as a guarantee of our inheritance (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14). The Holy Spirit is the “firstfruit” of future glory (Rom 8:23).<\/p>\nOne final aspect of the promise theme in the NT concerns the assurance of Christ’s second advent and the establishment of the new heavens and the new earth (cf. Jn 14:1-3; 2 Pt 3:4, 9, 13).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Covenant; God, Being and Attributes of; Hope; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROMISE Declaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified. Types of Promise In biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who giv...","summary_en":"PROMISE Declaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified. Types of Promise In biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who giv...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52505,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:1","content_ro":"31:1<\/strong> In that day:<\/em> This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC<\/span>. • all the families of Israel:<\/em> The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"31:1<\/strong> In that day:<\/em> This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC<\/span>. • all the families of Israel:<\/em> The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:1 In that day: This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC. • all the families of Israel: The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.","summary_en":"31:1 In that day: This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC. • all the families of Israel: The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80131,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:1","content_ro":"31:1<\/strong> In that day:<\/em> This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC<\/span>. • all the families of Israel:<\/em> The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"31:1<\/strong> In that day:<\/em> This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC<\/span>. • all the families of Israel:<\/em> The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:1 In that day: This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC. • all the families of Israel: The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.","summary_en":"31:1 In that day: This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC. • all the families of Israel: The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107757,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:1","content_ro":"31:1<\/strong> In that day:<\/em> This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC<\/span>. • all the families of Israel:<\/em> The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"31:1<\/strong> In that day:<\/em> This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC<\/span>. • all the families of Israel:<\/em> The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:1 In that day: This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC. • all the families of Israel: The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.","summary_en":"31:1 In that day: This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC. • all the families of Israel: The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135383,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:1","content_ro":"31:1<\/strong> In that day:<\/em> This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC<\/span>. • all the families of Israel:<\/em> The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"31:1<\/strong> In that day:<\/em> This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC<\/span>. • all the families of Israel:<\/em> The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:1 In that day: This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC. • all the families of Israel: The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.","summary_en":"31:1 In that day: This phrase refers to the return from exile that began in 538 BC. • all the families of Israel: The coming restoration included all twelve tribes of Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":52506,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:2","content_ro":"31:2<\/strong> The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction<\/em> at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:2<\/strong> The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction<\/em> at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:2 The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC.","summary_en":"31:2 The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80132,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:2","content_ro":"31:2<\/strong> The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction<\/em> at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:2<\/strong> The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction<\/em> at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:2 The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC.","summary_en":"31:2 The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107758,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:2","content_ro":"31:2<\/strong> The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction<\/em> at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:2<\/strong> The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction<\/em> at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:2 The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC.","summary_en":"31:2 The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135384,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:2","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:2","content_ro":"31:2<\/strong> The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction<\/em> at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:2<\/strong> The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction<\/em> at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:2 The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC.","summary_en":"31:2 The Lord directed his message to those who would survive the coming destruction at the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64041,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Promise of a Second Exodus","title_en":"The Promise of a Second Exodus","content_ro":"<h3>The Promise of a Second Exodus<\/h3>\nLike the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12).<\/p>\nBoth the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transforms the desert into a watering hole with vegetation and animals (43:19-20), removes obstacles along the way (42:16; 49:11), guides his people through the desert (42:16; 58:11; 63:13), feeds them (49:10), protects them from the desert heat (49:10), and strengthens them (58:11). He changes the experience of the exiles from sorrow to great joy (51:3) and pours out his Spirit on them (44:3-4).<\/p>\nAn exodus of sorts also occurs for all those who believe in Christ—an exodus from sin and death through Christ’s death and the power of his resurrection. The Holy Spirit enables believers to live in newness of life and to serve God with joy as they await the coming of his kingdom in all its fullness.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 35:8-10; 42:14-16; 43:18-21; 44:3-4; 48:20-21; 49:9-12; 52:11-12; 58:8-12; Jer 31:2-17; Joel 3:17-21; Luke 1:78-79; John 7:38; 15:19; 2 Cor 5:17; 6:17-18; Eph 5:8; Col 1:13; Heb 13:12-14; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Promise of a Second Exodus<\/h3>\nLike the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12).<\/p>\nBoth the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transforms the desert into a watering hole with vegetation and animals (43:19-20), removes obstacles along the way (42:16; 49:11), guides his people through the desert (42:16; 58:11; 63:13), feeds them (49:10), protects them from the desert heat (49:10), and strengthens them (58:11). He changes the experience of the exiles from sorrow to great joy (51:3) and pours out his Spirit on them (44:3-4).<\/p>\nAn exodus of sorts also occurs for all those who believe in Christ—an exodus from sin and death through Christ’s death and the power of his resurrection. The Holy Spirit enables believers to live in newness of life and to serve God with joy as they await the coming of his kingdom in all its fullness.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 35:8-10; 42:14-16; 43:18-21; 44:3-4; 48:20-21; 49:9-12; 52:11-12; 58:8-12; Jer 31:2-17; Joel 3:17-21; Luke 1:78-79; John 7:38; 15:19; 2 Cor 5:17; 6:17-18; Eph 5:8; Col 1:13; Heb 13:12-14; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Promise of a Second Exodus Like the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12). Both the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transfo...","summary_en":"The Promise of a Second Exodus Like the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12). Both the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transfo...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91667,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Promise of a Second Exodus","title_en":"The Promise of a Second Exodus","content_ro":"<h3>The Promise of a Second Exodus<\/h3>\nLike the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12).<\/p>\nBoth the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transforms the desert into a watering hole with vegetation and animals (43:19-20), removes obstacles along the way (42:16; 49:11), guides his people through the desert (42:16; 58:11; 63:13), feeds them (49:10), protects them from the desert heat (49:10), and strengthens them (58:11). He changes the experience of the exiles from sorrow to great joy (51:3) and pours out his Spirit on them (44:3-4).<\/p>\nAn exodus of sorts also occurs for all those who believe in Christ—an exodus from sin and death through Christ’s death and the power of his resurrection. The Holy Spirit enables believers to live in newness of life and to serve God with joy as they await the coming of his kingdom in all its fullness.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 35:8-10; 42:14-16; 43:18-21; 44:3-4; 48:20-21; 49:9-12; 52:11-12; 58:8-12; Jer 31:2-17; Joel 3:17-21; Luke 1:78-79; John 7:38; 15:19; 2 Cor 5:17; 6:17-18; Eph 5:8; Col 1:13; Heb 13:12-14; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Promise of a Second Exodus<\/h3>\nLike the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12).<\/p>\nBoth the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transforms the desert into a watering hole with vegetation and animals (43:19-20), removes obstacles along the way (42:16; 49:11), guides his people through the desert (42:16; 58:11; 63:13), feeds them (49:10), protects them from the desert heat (49:10), and strengthens them (58:11). He changes the experience of the exiles from sorrow to great joy (51:3) and pours out his Spirit on them (44:3-4).<\/p>\nAn exodus of sorts also occurs for all those who believe in Christ—an exodus from sin and death through Christ’s death and the power of his resurrection. The Holy Spirit enables believers to live in newness of life and to serve God with joy as they await the coming of his kingdom in all its fullness.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 35:8-10; 42:14-16; 43:18-21; 44:3-4; 48:20-21; 49:9-12; 52:11-12; 58:8-12; Jer 31:2-17; Joel 3:17-21; Luke 1:78-79; John 7:38; 15:19; 2 Cor 5:17; 6:17-18; Eph 5:8; Col 1:13; Heb 13:12-14; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Promise of a Second Exodus Like the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12). Both the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transfo...","summary_en":"The Promise of a Second Exodus Like the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12). Both the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transfo...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119293,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Promise of a Second Exodus","title_en":"The Promise of a Second Exodus","content_ro":"<h3>The Promise of a Second Exodus<\/h3>\nLike the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12).<\/p>\nBoth the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transforms the desert into a watering hole with vegetation and animals (43:19-20), removes obstacles along the way (42:16; 49:11), guides his people through the desert (42:16; 58:11; 63:13), feeds them (49:10), protects them from the desert heat (49:10), and strengthens them (58:11). He changes the experience of the exiles from sorrow to great joy (51:3) and pours out his Spirit on them (44:3-4).<\/p>\nAn exodus of sorts also occurs for all those who believe in Christ—an exodus from sin and death through Christ’s death and the power of his resurrection. The Holy Spirit enables believers to live in newness of life and to serve God with joy as they await the coming of his kingdom in all its fullness.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 35:8-10; 42:14-16; 43:18-21; 44:3-4; 48:20-21; 49:9-12; 52:11-12; 58:8-12; Jer 31:2-17; Joel 3:17-21; Luke 1:78-79; John 7:38; 15:19; 2 Cor 5:17; 6:17-18; Eph 5:8; Col 1:13; Heb 13:12-14; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Promise of a Second Exodus<\/h3>\nLike the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12).<\/p>\nBoth the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transforms the desert into a watering hole with vegetation and animals (43:19-20), removes obstacles along the way (42:16; 49:11), guides his people through the desert (42:16; 58:11; 63:13), feeds them (49:10), protects them from the desert heat (49:10), and strengthens them (58:11). He changes the experience of the exiles from sorrow to great joy (51:3) and pours out his Spirit on them (44:3-4).<\/p>\nAn exodus of sorts also occurs for all those who believe in Christ—an exodus from sin and death through Christ’s death and the power of his resurrection. The Holy Spirit enables believers to live in newness of life and to serve God with joy as they await the coming of his kingdom in all its fullness.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 35:8-10; 42:14-16; 43:18-21; 44:3-4; 48:20-21; 49:9-12; 52:11-12; 58:8-12; Jer 31:2-17; Joel 3:17-21; Luke 1:78-79; John 7:38; 15:19; 2 Cor 5:17; 6:17-18; Eph 5:8; Col 1:13; Heb 13:12-14; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Promise of a Second Exodus Like the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12). Both the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transfo...","summary_en":"The Promise of a Second Exodus Like the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12). Both the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transfo...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146919,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Promise of a Second Exodus","title_en":"The Promise of a Second Exodus","content_ro":"<h3>The Promise of a Second Exodus<\/h3>\nLike the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12).<\/p>\nBoth the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transforms the desert into a watering hole with vegetation and animals (43:19-20), removes obstacles along the way (42:16; 49:11), guides his people through the desert (42:16; 58:11; 63:13), feeds them (49:10), protects them from the desert heat (49:10), and strengthens them (58:11). He changes the experience of the exiles from sorrow to great joy (51:3) and pours out his Spirit on them (44:3-4).<\/p>\nAn exodus of sorts also occurs for all those who believe in Christ—an exodus from sin and death through Christ’s death and the power of his resurrection. The Holy Spirit enables believers to live in newness of life and to serve God with joy as they await the coming of his kingdom in all its fullness.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 35:8-10; 42:14-16; 43:18-21; 44:3-4; 48:20-21; 49:9-12; 52:11-12; 58:8-12; Jer 31:2-17; Joel 3:17-21; Luke 1:78-79; John 7:38; 15:19; 2 Cor 5:17; 6:17-18; Eph 5:8; Col 1:13; Heb 13:12-14; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Promise of a Second Exodus<\/h3>\nLike the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12).<\/p>\nBoth the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transforms the desert into a watering hole with vegetation and animals (43:19-20), removes obstacles along the way (42:16; 49:11), guides his people through the desert (42:16; 58:11; 63:13), feeds them (49:10), protects them from the desert heat (49:10), and strengthens them (58:11). He changes the experience of the exiles from sorrow to great joy (51:3) and pours out his Spirit on them (44:3-4).<\/p>\nAn exodus of sorts also occurs for all those who believe in Christ—an exodus from sin and death through Christ’s death and the power of his resurrection. The Holy Spirit enables believers to live in newness of life and to serve God with joy as they await the coming of his kingdom in all its fullness.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 35:8-10; 42:14-16; 43:18-21; 44:3-4; 48:20-21; 49:9-12; 52:11-12; 58:8-12; Jer 31:2-17; Joel 3:17-21; Luke 1:78-79; John 7:38; 15:19; 2 Cor 5:17; 6:17-18; Eph 5:8; Col 1:13; Heb 13:12-14; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Promise of a Second Exodus Like the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12). Both the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transfo...","summary_en":"The Promise of a Second Exodus Like the exodus from Egypt, Israel’s return from exile would restore God’s people to the land. Just as they had left Egypt many years before, the people of Israel would leave Babylon (Isa 48:20-21). This time they would have to be cleansed (52:11) and would not rush their departure (52:12). Both the experience in exile and the journey are likened to a desert (see 35:1) from which the Lord would bring rescue. He prepares a road through the desert (43:19), transfo...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":31536,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Prophecy","title_en":"Prophecy","content_ro":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\nTerm, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\nProphecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\nOne of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\nFurther insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\nDreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\nMore frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\nOne of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\nAll prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\nThe prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\nThe ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\nThis kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\nTypes of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\nThere are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\nThe Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote>“O Sovereign Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote>“Don’t say that,” the Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\nSimilar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\nThe second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\nIn the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\nHere we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\nThe Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\nThe most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\nThe prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\nThe common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\nThe prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\nThe prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\nSince the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\nThe prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\nProphecy in the New Testament<\/p>\nIn contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\nJohn the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\nJesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\nWhile the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\nAmong the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\nThe beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\nAccording to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\nThe Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\nChristian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\nEarly Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\nAccording to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\nWe know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\nUnlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\nTerm, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\nProphecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\nOne of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\nFurther insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\nDreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\nMore frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\nOne of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\nAll prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\nThe prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\nThe ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\nThis kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\nTypes of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\nThere are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\nThe Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote>“O Sovereign Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote>“Don’t say that,” the Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\nSimilar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\nThe second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\nIn the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\nHere we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\nThe Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\nThe most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\nThe prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\nThe common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\nThe prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\nThe prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\nSince the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\nThe prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\nProphecy in the New Testament<\/p>\nIn contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\nJohn the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\nJesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\nWhile the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\nAmong the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\nThe beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\nAccording to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\nThe Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\nChristian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\nEarly Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\nAccording to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\nWe know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\nUnlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","summary_en":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52507,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:3","content_ro":"31:3<\/strong> Long ago<\/em>,<\/em> the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).<\/p>","content_en":"31:3<\/strong> Long ago<\/em>,<\/em> the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:3 Long ago, the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).","summary_en":"31:3 Long ago, the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80133,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:3","content_ro":"31:3<\/strong> Long ago<\/em>,<\/em> the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).<\/p>","content_en":"31:3<\/strong> Long ago<\/em>,<\/em> the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:3 Long ago, the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).","summary_en":"31:3 Long ago, the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107759,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:3","content_ro":"31:3<\/strong> Long ago<\/em>,<\/em> the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).<\/p>","content_en":"31:3<\/strong> Long ago<\/em>,<\/em> the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:3 Long ago, the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).","summary_en":"31:3 Long ago, the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135385,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:3","content_ro":"31:3<\/strong> Long ago<\/em>,<\/em> the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).<\/p>","content_en":"31:3<\/strong> Long ago<\/em>,<\/em> the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:3 Long ago, the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).","summary_en":"31:3 Long ago, the Lord had revealed himself during the Exodus (see Exod 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7; Num 14:18-19; Deut 5:10; 7:7, 10, 12-13; 10:15, 18).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":36687,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tabret*","title_en":"Tabret*","content_ro":"<h3>TABRET*<\/h3>\nKJV rendering of tambourine in Genesis 31:27 and 1 Samuel 10:5, and timbrel in 1 Samuel 18:6, Job 17:6, Isaiah 5:12, 24:8, 30:32, and Jeremiah 31:4. See<\/em> Musical Instruments (Toph).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TABRET*<\/h3>\nKJV rendering of tambourine in Genesis 31:27 and 1 Samuel 10:5, and timbrel in 1 Samuel 18:6, Job 17:6, Isaiah 5:12, 24:8, 30:32, and Jeremiah 31:4. See<\/em> Musical Instruments (Toph).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TABRET* KJV rendering of tambourine in Genesis 31:27 and 1 Samuel 10:5, and timbrel in 1 Samuel 18:6, Job 17:6, Isaiah 5:12, 24:8, 30:32, and Jeremiah 31:4. See Musical Instruments (Toph).","summary_en":"TABRET* KJV rendering of tambourine in Genesis 31:27 and 1 Samuel 10:5, and timbrel in 1 Samuel 18:6, Job 17:6, Isaiah 5:12, 24:8, 30:32, and Jeremiah 31:4. See Musical Instruments (Toph).","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52508,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:4","content_ro":"31:4<\/strong> In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin<\/em>,<\/em> as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.<\/p>","content_en":"31:4<\/strong> In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin<\/em>,<\/em> as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:4 In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin, as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.","summary_en":"31:4 In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin, as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80134,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:4","content_ro":"31:4<\/strong> In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin<\/em>,<\/em> as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.<\/p>","content_en":"31:4<\/strong> In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin<\/em>,<\/em> as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:4 In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin, as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.","summary_en":"31:4 In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin, as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107760,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:4","content_ro":"31:4<\/strong> In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin<\/em>,<\/em> as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.<\/p>","content_en":"31:4<\/strong> In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin<\/em>,<\/em> as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:4 In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin, as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.","summary_en":"31:4 In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin, as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135386,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:4","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:4","content_ro":"31:4<\/strong> In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin<\/em>,<\/em> as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.<\/p>","content_en":"31:4<\/strong> In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin<\/em>,<\/em> as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:4 In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin, as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.","summary_en":"31:4 In their homeland, the Israelites had been guilty of “adultery” with false gods. The restored community would be like a virgin, as though the people had never forsaken the Lord. The happiness and joy of their celebrations would manifest this transformation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61329,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Celebration","title_en":"Celebration","content_ro":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","summary_en":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88955,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Celebration","title_en":"Celebration","content_ro":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","summary_en":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116581,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Celebration","title_en":"Celebration","content_ro":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","summary_en":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144207,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Celebration","title_en":"Celebration","content_ro":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","summary_en":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":52509,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:5","content_ro":"31:5<\/strong> Samaria<\/em> was located in north-central Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"31:5<\/strong> Samaria<\/em> was located in north-central Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:5 Samaria was located in north-central Israel.","summary_en":"31:5 Samaria was located in north-central Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80135,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:5","content_ro":"31:5<\/strong> Samaria<\/em> was located in north-central Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"31:5<\/strong> Samaria<\/em> was located in north-central Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:5 Samaria was located in north-central Israel.","summary_en":"31:5 Samaria was located in north-central Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107761,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:5","content_ro":"31:5<\/strong> Samaria<\/em> was located in north-central Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"31:5<\/strong> Samaria<\/em> was located in north-central Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:5 Samaria was located in north-central Israel.","summary_en":"31:5 Samaria was located in north-central Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135387,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:5","content_ro":"31:5<\/strong> Samaria<\/em> was located in north-central Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"31:5<\/strong> Samaria<\/em> was located in north-central Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:5 Samaria was located in north-central Israel.","summary_en":"31:5 Samaria was located in north-central Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":52510,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:6","content_ro":"31:6<\/strong> In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).<\/p>","content_en":"31:6<\/strong> In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:6 In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).","summary_en":"31:6 In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80136,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:6","content_ro":"31:6<\/strong> In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).<\/p>","content_en":"31:6<\/strong> In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:6 In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).","summary_en":"31:6 In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107762,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:6","content_ro":"31:6<\/strong> In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).<\/p>","content_en":"31:6<\/strong> In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:6 In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).","summary_en":"31:6 In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135388,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:6","content_ro":"31:6<\/strong> In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).<\/p>","content_en":"31:6<\/strong> In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:6 In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).","summary_en":"31:6 In the fully restored nation, the kingdom would no longer be divided (1 Kgs 12:16-29; Ezek 37:16-22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":15567,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Head","title_en":"Head","content_ro":"<h3>HEAD<\/h3>\nThe uppermost portion of the body, containing the brain, major sense organs, and the mouth. It appears many times in the Bible as a physical description. The Hebrew term for head<\/em> is also used figuratively in the Old Testament. Frequently, it designates prominence or authority.<\/p>\nTo raise one’s head was considered an act of pride (Ps 140:9) or honor (Gn 40:20; Pss 3:3; 27:6). Bowing the head signified humility (Is 58:5) or sadness (Lam 2:10). The Hebrew word is used metaphorically of mountain peaks (Gn 8:5), the tops of buildings (Gn 11:4) or trees (2 Sm 5:24), and river sources (Gn 2:10). The term was commonly used to designate positions of political, military, or familiar authority. In this sense the “head” exercised control over all those subjected to him (Jgs 10:18; 1 Sm 15:17; Ps 18:43; Is 7:8-9; Jer 31:7; Hos 1:11). David was called the “keeper of mine head” (kjv<\/span>) when he served as the bodyguard of Achish (1 Sm 28:2; cf. Jgs 9:53; Ps 68:21).<\/p>\nGreek philosophers used the image of the body to represent the universe. The head of this body—called Zeus or Reason—was considered responsible for the creation and sustenance of the remaining members (celestial beings, humans, animals, plants, and inanimate objects). The universe, or “body,” owed its existence to the “head.”<\/p>\nBetween 460 BC<\/span> (the date usually ascribed to the first writings of Hippocrates) and AD<\/span> 200 (the death of Galen, who developed Hippocrates’ findings), Greek medical science came to understand the head as the seat of intelligence. The body was able to operate efficiently only because the brain was capable of interpreting data received from the body (eyes, ears, skin, and so on), and because it was able to send out appropriate impulses to the various members of the body, based upon the data received. The ability of the brain to interpret and direct made the existence of the body completely dependent upon it.<\/p>\nIn the NT, the term refers to the actual human head (Mt 5:36; 6:17; 14:8; 26:7; Mk 6:27; 14:3; Lk 7:46; Jn 13:9; 20:7), to apocalyptic beings (Rv 1:14; 4:4; 12:1), and to animals (Rv 9:7, 17, 19; 12:3). Furthermore, it appears in such expressions as “to heap coals of fire upon the head,” meaning to return good for evil (Rom 12:20; cf. Mt 5:44); to “shear” or “anoint the head” expressing a vow (Acts 21:24); and “to lay down the head,” meaning to sleep (Mt 8:20; Lk 9:58).<\/p>\nThe apostle Paul drew from the OT metaphorical understanding of the term to express the headship of God over Christ, Christ over man, and man over woman (1 Cor 11:3-16; cf. Eph 5:23). In the light of these relationships, Paul encouraged women at Corinth to wear veils in worship. The veil gave a woman the authority to worship as an equal with men before God. The term is used again with the meaning “authority” to express the lordship of Christ over the universe (Eph 1:21-22; Col 2:10).<\/p>\nPaul used the image of the head and body to express the relationship between Christ and his church (Eph 4:15; 5:23; cf. 1 Cor 12:12-27). In addition to the OT sense, the contributions of medical science in Paul’s day may provide insight into this image, for Christ is not only the dominant ruler over the church but also the dynamic force that provides its direction and unity. The ability of the church to exist and the focal point of its activity are rooted in the work of its “head,” Jesus Christ. In this light, various modern exegetes have argued that headship does not mean “authority” as much as it means “source,” as in the term “fountainhead.” Thus, he who is the head is the source, the supplier. These interpreters see God as being Christ’s supplier, and Christ being the church’s supplier, and man being woman’s supplier.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEAD<\/h3>\nThe uppermost portion of the body, containing the brain, major sense organs, and the mouth. It appears many times in the Bible as a physical description. The Hebrew term for head<\/em> is also used figuratively in the Old Testament. Frequently, it designates prominence or authority.<\/p>\nTo raise one’s head was considered an act of pride (Ps 140:9) or honor (Gn 40:20; Pss 3:3; 27:6). Bowing the head signified humility (Is 58:5) or sadness (Lam 2:10). The Hebrew word is used metaphorically of mountain peaks (Gn 8:5), the tops of buildings (Gn 11:4) or trees (2 Sm 5:24), and river sources (Gn 2:10). The term was commonly used to designate positions of political, military, or familiar authority. In this sense the “head” exercised control over all those subjected to him (Jgs 10:18; 1 Sm 15:17; Ps 18:43; Is 7:8-9; Jer 31:7; Hos 1:11). David was called the “keeper of mine head” (kjv<\/span>) when he served as the bodyguard of Achish (1 Sm 28:2; cf. Jgs 9:53; Ps 68:21).<\/p>\nGreek philosophers used the image of the body to represent the universe. The head of this body—called Zeus or Reason—was considered responsible for the creation and sustenance of the remaining members (celestial beings, humans, animals, plants, and inanimate objects). The universe, or “body,” owed its existence to the “head.”<\/p>\nBetween 460 BC<\/span> (the date usually ascribed to the first writings of Hippocrates) and AD<\/span> 200 (the death of Galen, who developed Hippocrates’ findings), Greek medical science came to understand the head as the seat of intelligence. The body was able to operate efficiently only because the brain was capable of interpreting data received from the body (eyes, ears, skin, and so on), and because it was able to send out appropriate impulses to the various members of the body, based upon the data received. The ability of the brain to interpret and direct made the existence of the body completely dependent upon it.<\/p>\nIn the NT, the term refers to the actual human head (Mt 5:36; 6:17; 14:8; 26:7; Mk 6:27; 14:3; Lk 7:46; Jn 13:9; 20:7), to apocalyptic beings (Rv 1:14; 4:4; 12:1), and to animals (Rv 9:7, 17, 19; 12:3). Furthermore, it appears in such expressions as “to heap coals of fire upon the head,” meaning to return good for evil (Rom 12:20; cf. Mt 5:44); to “shear” or “anoint the head” expressing a vow (Acts 21:24); and “to lay down the head,” meaning to sleep (Mt 8:20; Lk 9:58).<\/p>\nThe apostle Paul drew from the OT metaphorical understanding of the term to express the headship of God over Christ, Christ over man, and man over woman (1 Cor 11:3-16; cf. Eph 5:23). In the light of these relationships, Paul encouraged women at Corinth to wear veils in worship. The veil gave a woman the authority to worship as an equal with men before God. The term is used again with the meaning “authority” to express the lordship of Christ over the universe (Eph 1:21-22; Col 2:10).<\/p>\nPaul used the image of the head and body to express the relationship between Christ and his church (Eph 4:15; 5:23; cf. 1 Cor 12:12-27). In addition to the OT sense, the contributions of medical science in Paul’s day may provide insight into this image, for Christ is not only the dominant ruler over the church but also the dynamic force that provides its direction and unity. The ability of the church to exist and the focal point of its activity are rooted in the work of its “head,” Jesus Christ. In this light, various modern exegetes have argued that headship does not mean “authority” as much as it means “source,” as in the term “fountainhead.” Thus, he who is the head is the source, the supplier. These interpreters see God as being Christ’s supplier, and Christ being the church’s supplier, and man being woman’s supplier.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEAD The uppermost portion of the body, containing the brain, major sense organs, and the mouth. It appears many times in the Bible as a physical description. The Hebrew term for head is also used figuratively in the Old Testament. Frequently, it designates prominence or authority. To raise one’s head was considered an act of pride (Ps 140:9) or honor (Gn 40:20; Pss 3:3; 27:6). Bowing the head signified humility (Is 58:5) or sadness (Lam 2:10). The Hebrew word is used metaphorically of mounta...","summary_en":"HEAD The uppermost portion of the body, containing the brain, major sense organs, and the mouth. It appears many times in the Bible as a physical description. The Hebrew term for head is also used figuratively in the Old Testament. Frequently, it designates prominence or authority. To raise one’s head was considered an act of pride (Ps 140:9) or honor (Gn 40:20; Pss 3:3; 27:6). Bowing the head signified humility (Is 58:5) or sadness (Lam 2:10). The Hebrew word is used metaphorically of mounta...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52511,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:7","content_ro":"31:7<\/strong> The remnant<\/em> refers to those who were living in exile.<\/p>","content_en":"31:7<\/strong> The remnant<\/em> refers to those who were living in exile.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:7 The remnant refers to those who were living in exile.","summary_en":"31:7 The remnant refers to those who were living in exile.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80137,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:7","content_ro":"31:7<\/strong> The remnant<\/em> refers to those who were living in exile.<\/p>","content_en":"31:7<\/strong> The remnant<\/em> refers to those who were living in exile.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:7 The remnant refers to those who were living in exile.","summary_en":"31:7 The remnant refers to those who were living in exile.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107763,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:7","content_ro":"31:7<\/strong> The remnant<\/em> refers to those who were living in exile.<\/p>","content_en":"31:7<\/strong> The remnant<\/em> refers to those who were living in exile.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:7 The remnant refers to those who were living in exile.","summary_en":"31:7 The remnant refers to those who were living in exile.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135389,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:7","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:7","content_ro":"31:7<\/strong> The remnant<\/em> refers to those who were living in exile.<\/p>","content_en":"31:7<\/strong> The remnant<\/em> refers to those who were living in exile.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:7 The remnant refers to those who were living in exile.","summary_en":"31:7 The remnant refers to those who were living in exile.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63837,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Remnant","title_en":"The Remnant","content_ro":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","summary_en":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65164,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\nJesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\nIn the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\nJesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\nIn the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91463,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Remnant","title_en":"The Remnant","content_ro":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","summary_en":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92790,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\nJesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\nIn the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\nJesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\nIn the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119089,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Remnant","title_en":"The Remnant","content_ro":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","summary_en":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120416,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\nJesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\nIn the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\nJesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\nIn the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146715,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Remnant","title_en":"The Remnant","content_ro":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Remnant<\/h3>\nIn the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness.<\/p>\nThe theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub, which means “a remnant will return” (Isa 7:3; see 10:21). Isaiah prophesied that when the Lord judged his people with destruction (which occurred at the hands of the Babylonians in 605–586 BC<\/span>), he would save a small community—the remnant—to be the core of a new beginning. Because the population of Judah would be decimated (as the northern kingdom of Israel had been already), this remnant would be a very small beginning. It is depicted as a “branch” (4:2), a “stump” (6:13), a community of the “poor” and “needy” (25:4), and “handpicked grain” (27:12-13). This remnant was to put their trust in the Lord while waiting for him to establish his rule and come to reward them (see 3:10; 40:10). The Lord promised that this small community would swell into a huge multitude that would come out of both Israel and the Gentile nations (27:6; 60:3).<\/p>\nIn fulfillment of prophecy, a remnant of God’s people were allowed to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia (Ezra 1:2-4). Ezra the priest recognized this preservation of a remnant as purely an act of God’s grace, an act that could be jeopardized if the people followed their ancestors in disobedience (Ezra 9:5-15).<\/p>\nThe notion of the remnant serves as an encouragement to remain faithful to God in the midst of the unfaithfulness of others. In the case of the people of Israel and Judah, such faithfulness would lead to the restoration of their land and to the blessings God had promised his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Kgs 19:31; 2 Chr 36:20; Ezra 9:14; Isa 1:8-9; 4:1-3; 6:13; 10:19-22; 11:10-16; 27:12-13; 28:5; 37:31-32; 46:3-4; Jer 6:9; 23:3-4; 31:7-8; Amos 5:15; Mic 2:12; 4:6-7; 5:7-8; 7:18; Zeph 3:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","summary_en":"The Remnant In the face of foreign invasion and the prospect of exile, the notion of the remnant was a source of hope for God’s people (see Mic 2:12-13; 4:6-8). While the Exile would be the outworking of God’s judgment on his people, God indicated that he would not completely destroy them (see Hos 11:8-11). The fact that a remnant was preserved demonstrated God’s mercy and faithfulness. The theme of the remnant was integral to Isaiah’s message. In fact, one of his sons was named Shear-jashub,...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148042,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\nJesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\nIn the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\nJesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\nIn the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":7751,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Corners of the Earth","title_en":"Corners of the Earth","content_ro":"<h3>CORNERS OF THE EARTH<\/h3>\nFigurative term denoting the borders and extremities of the earth (Jb 37:3; Is 11:12; Jer 25:32; 31:8; Ez 7:2; Rv 7:1; 20:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CORNERS OF THE EARTH<\/h3>\nFigurative term denoting the borders and extremities of the earth (Jb 37:3; Is 11:12; Jer 25:32; 31:8; Ez 7:2; Rv 7:1; 20:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"CORNERS OF THE EARTH Figurative term denoting the borders and extremities of the earth (Jb 37:3; Is 11:12; Jer 25:32; 31:8; Ez 7:2; Rv 7:1; 20:8).","summary_en":"CORNERS OF THE EARTH Figurative term denoting the borders and extremities of the earth (Jb 37:3; Is 11:12; Jer 25:32; 31:8; Ez 7:2; Rv 7:1; 20:8).","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":18930,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jeremiah (Person)","title_en":"Jeremiah (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JEREMIAH (Person<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Prophet to Judah before its fall in 586 BC<\/span>; his name is also spelled “Jeremias” (Mt 16:14) and “Jeremy” (Mt 2:17; 27:9) in the kjv<\/span>.<\/li>\nJeremiah was born in the village of Anathoth, about three miles (4.8 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem. His father’s name was Hilkiah, and he belonged to the tribe of Benjamin. His call came in the 13th year of King Josiah (640–609 BC<\/span>). He refers to himself as “a child” when called (Jer 1:6), but the Hebrew word is not the same as used in Jeremiah 30:6 and 31:8 and cannot be limited to preadolescence. He was probably referring to his inexperience rather than to his age. Jeremiah was born about 657 BC<\/span> during the reign of the wicked king Manasseh, while the great Ashurbanipal, who had shaken the world by sacking the ancient Egyptian city of Thebes in 663 BC<\/span>, ruled a world empire from Assyria.<\/p>\nGod informed Jeremiah that he had consecrated and appointed him before birth (Jer 1:4-5). Jeremiah first shrank with a sense of inadequacy and fear: “O Sovereign Lord<\/span>, . . . I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!” (v 6, nlt<\/span>). God would not allow Jeremiah to excuse himself. He was assured that words would be given him to speak, and guidance given for the way (v 7). He was promised protection (v 18) and deliverance (v 8) despite opposition (v 19). God touched his mouth, signifying divine inspiration of his words, and gave the sign of a branch from an almond tree, explaining that the Lord is watching (see nlt<\/span> mg). The third sign was the boiling pot (v 13) facing from the north, picturing the source and fury of impending disaster.<\/p>\nThus the tone of Jeremiah’s life ministry was set: judgment, disaster, danger, defeat, and impending death for the nation.<\/p>\nEarly Ministry<\/p>\nThe messages given by Jeremiah during his first five years of ministry may have been instrumental in the great revival of 622 BC<\/span>. Those cooperating with King Josiah in the reformation and friendly with Jeremiah included Ahikam and his father, Shaphan (Jer 26:24); Gedaliah, Ahikam’s son (39:14), who later became governor; Acbor, son of Micaiah, also called Abdon, whose son Elnathan joined the opposition (26:22) but later repented (36:25); and Asaiah (2 Chr 34:20). The prophets Nahum and Zephaniah also influenced the reform movement, which must have climaxed under the preaching of Habakkuk and Jeremiah, the priestly ministry of Hilkiah, and the prophecies of Huldah the prophetess. During the reign of King Josiah, Jeremiah spoke without the fear of persecution that plagued his later ministry. Though the content of the book of Jeremiah sometimes appears to be fragmentary, most of chapters 1–19 date to the time of Josiah.<\/p>\nThe finding of the lost Book of the Covenant in the temple debris may be the reason for the words in Jeremiah 15:16: “Your words are what sustain me. They bring me great joy and are my heart’s delight” (nlt<\/span>). The words “So be it, Lord<\/span>” (Jer 11:5) in a context recalling the words of Moses in the Torah may be Jeremiah’s response after hearing King Josiah read the newly found book.<\/p>\nSmall towns and rural areas, including his hometown, heard Jeremiah’s denunciation of high places and idolatry. They sought to kill the young prophet, or at least to intimidate him (11:21). Instead of being silent, Jeremiah asserted that his motivation was for their good and condemned their resistance to the truth as their greatest danger.<\/p>\nShortly after Jeremiah began his ministry, a number of world-changing events took place. Ashurbanipal died and the Assyrian Empire rapidly declined. Nabopolassar began a 21-year reign in Babylon, leading an expansion that culminated in his son Nebuchadnezzar’s subjugation of the known world. As the world news filtered in, Jeremiah turned more toward Jerusalem. His first temple speeches (chs 7–10) may have been uttered at this time.<\/p>\nNabopolassar felt his strength sufficient to launch an attack against Assyrian territory in 616 BC<\/span>, but he advanced cautiously because Psamtik I (Psammetichus) of Egypt appeared ready to aid Assyria. Cyaxares of Media pounced on Assyria when Babylon hesitated and took its most sacred city, Asshur, in 614 BC<\/span>. Babylon joined Media, along with Scythia, and waged an assault against Nineveh, which fell late in the summer of 612 BC<\/span>. The Assyrian Empire had shriveled to two small holdings, Haran and Carchemish.<\/p>\nNabopolassar took Haran in 610, and Ashuruballit, having escaped, appealed to Egypt for help at Carchemish. Neco, who had become pharaoh within the year, responded immediately. He marched through Judah without giving Josiah prior notice and asked that the Jews not bother him in view of his haste to go northward (2 Chr 35:21). Ignoring the request, Josiah pursued them to Megiddo and was wounded in the ensuing battle; he died in Jerusalem.<\/p>\nMinistry during the Reign of Jehoiakim<\/p>\nIn place of Jehoahaz, Josiah’s fourth son, who reigned only three months, Pharaoh Neco enthroned Jehoiakim (Eliakim). Neco demanded heavy indemnity payments from Judah and took Jehoahaz prisoner as collateral to assure payment (2 Kgs 23:31-33).<\/p>\nEarly in the reign of Jehoiakim, Jeremiah, moved by God’s Spirit, delivered his third temple speech (Jer 26) on the occasion of one of the annual Jewish feasts. He called for the people to repent and to act on the basis of the revelation they had heard repeatedly from the Book of the Law. The barb of the sermon came in the warning: “This is what the Lord<\/span> says: If you will not listen to me and obey the law I have given you, and if you will not listen to my servants, the prophets—for I sent them again and again to warn you, but you would not listen to them—then I will destroy this Temple as I destroyed Shiloh, the place where the Tabernacle was located. And I will make Jerusalem an object of cursing in every nation on earth” (26:4-6, nlt<\/span>). Shiloh had been the heart of Jewish worship from Joshua to Samuel, but after being destroyed by the Philistines, it never revived. It served as an example of complete desolation following God’s judgment in the days of Eli.<\/p>\nCrowds gathered rapidly and reacted angrily against Jeremiah. Priests and princes hurried to the New Gate, where a court was established to bring order and to control violence. Jehoiakim would be no help to Jeremiah, for he had refused to listen to God’s messages (Jer 22:21). The priests and false prophets spoke against Jeremiah, calling him a traitor. Then some of the elders spoke to the people about Uriah, who had prophesied the same message. Rather than risk disaster, Ahikam persuaded the court to spare Jeremiah.<\/p>\nEgypt controlled Palestine and Syria after the decay of the Assyrian Empire. In 606 BC<\/span> Egypt succeeded in annihilating a garrison city of Babylonian soldiers south of Carchemish and then reoccupied Carchemish to await the return blow from Babylon. This Egyptian victory meant persecution for Jeremiah, who was often accused of false prophecy (cf. Jer 20).<\/p>\nJeremiah never had confidence in Egypt. Each time a Jewish leader would call for a new alliance with Egypt, Jeremiah repeated God’s message against it. Whenever a Jewish group fled to Egypt for security, Jeremiah warned of worse things in that land of false refuge (see Jer 44:26-27). Jeremiah’s ode and prophecy in chapter 46 poetically describe Egypt’s defeat at Carchemish, when Nabopolassar sent his son Nebuchadnezzar to destroy them (605 BC<\/span>). After smashing the Egyptian army at Carchemish, Nebuchadnezzar pursued the enemy through Judah. “Not a single man escaped to his own country,” reads the exaggerated Babylonian record. His father’s death, however, prevented him from invading Egypt, and he returned to Babylon to assume the throne. The following year Nebuchadnezzar, now king of Babylonia, returned to accept the homage of the rulers of Judah, Syria, and Phoenicia. On this occasion God gave Jeremiah his great 70-year prophecy (Jer 25:11-12), which became the basis of Daniel 9:2, 24-27.<\/p>\nA year after the decisive battle at Carchemish, Baruch, Jeremiah’s scribe, finished recording all the dictated words of Jeremiah and was reading from this scroll at the temple. A report reached the king, who sent Jehudi, a servant, to fetch the scroll and read it to him. When this was done, Jehoiakim burned the scroll in spite of his counselors, who pleaded that the king not do it (Jer 36:23-25). God’s message, soon rewritten, added a promise of fearful judgment on Jehoiakim (vv 27-31).<\/p>\nAmbitious young Nebuchadnezzar determined to add Egypt to his dominion. In 601 BC<\/span> he led his forces through Judah again, but Neco had advance warning and was prepared for the onslaught. In the desert of Shur, Nebuchadnezzar suffered defeat. Encouraged by this display of Egyptian defensive strength, the pro-Egyptian parties in Judah asserted themselves, persuading Jehoiakim to lead them to freedom from Babylon by making an alliance with Egypt (2 Kgs 24:1). But help from Egypt did not come (v 7).<\/p>\nIn 599 BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar armed those surrounding the rebel Jewish kingdom to harass the Jews, which they willingly did (2 Kgs 24:2). Evidently Jehoiakim lost his life in one of these raids. Since the people despised him, his body was thrown out without honorable burial, as Jeremiah had predicted (Jer 22:19).<\/p>\nMinistry during the Reign of Zedekiah<\/p>\nNebuchadnezzar’s siege of Jerusalem in 598 BC<\/span> lasted only a short time because the new king, Jehoiachin, crowned at age 18, knew resistance was useless. He gave himself up, with all his family and court, in March of 597 BC<\/span>, after serving as king about three months. The Babylonian Chronicle reads: “He [Nebuchadnezzar] seized the city and captured the king.”<\/p>\nJehoiachin was carried to Babylon along with 8,000 (2 Kgs 24:16; cf. v 14) officers, artisans, and executives (Ezekiel among them) and much booty. In his place Nebuchadnezzar appointed Zedekiah, Jehoiachin’s uncle, to rule. Zedekiah proceeded to organize his government with the less capable and inexperienced help left after the deportation.<\/p>\nJeremiah took up his thankless ministry, calling on the Jews to believe God, obey the laws of Babylon, and reject false hopes in Egypt. Zedekiah turned a deaf ear to these appeals, listening rather to the unwise advice of his counselors (Jer 37:1-2). During the first year of Zedekiah’s rule, Jeremiah received the vision of the two baskets of figs. The Jews carried to Babylon were like good figs, while Zedekiah and those who trusted in Egypt were like rotten figs (24:1-8). The reason for this reproachful description was that the Jews began plotting rebellion against Babylon along with Edom, Moab, Ammon, Tyre, and Sidon from the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah (27:1-3), thus breaking their oath of loyalty to Nebuchadnezzar and repudiating God’s message through Jeremiah.<\/p>\nIn Egypt the pharaoh began to renew plans to organize dissidents within the Babylonian Empire to revolt. He hired Jewish soldiers to aid him in protecting his southern border. The Jewish soldiers settled on a Nile island called Elephantine, or Yeb (593–410 BC<\/span>). Jeremiah addressed an oracle to these Jews (ch 44). The treaty for Jews to help in Egypt evidently also assumed that Egyptians would aid Israel. When the Babylonians besieged Jerusalem in 589, Pharaoh Hophra came to the aid of Zedekiah. Nebuchadnezzar, ruling from Riblah, commanded that the siege against Jerusalem be lifted in order to make a surprise attack on Hophra (37:5). The release gave Jeremiah an opportunity to journey to Anathoth to secure some family property (v 12). However, Irijah, captain of the guard, arrested Jeremiah in the Gate of Benjamin for defecting to the enemy, and he was beaten and flung into a dungeon. King Zedekiah brought him out after many days to obtain a prognostication. With characteristic boldness, Jeremiah told the king he would shortly become a captive. At the same time, Jeremiah requested relief from injustice for himself. He gained part of his request but continued as prisoner in the court of the guard.<\/p>\nThe Babylonian army chased Pharaoh Hophra back to Egypt and returned to crush Jerusalem without further mercy. The siege, which began in 589 BC<\/span>, was restored with rigor in January of 588, Zedekiah’s ninth year (39:1). During this time, the Lord gave Jeremiah foreknowledge of a visit from a cousin who wished to sell a field near Anathoth (32:7-9; cf. 37:12). Jeremiah bought the field as an object lesson to verify the message of restoration after a captivity of 70 years (29:10).<\/p>\nThe armies of Babylon cut off all supplies from Jerusalem and were able to destroy the last two outlying Jewish fortresses of Lachish and Azekah (34:7). Food became scarce. Disease spread. Undisposed-of sewage and impure cistern water caused pestilence. With increased distress came Jeremiah’s increased appeal for the city to surrender.<\/p>\nJeremiah remained in the prison court until the Babylonians breached the city wall in July of 586 BC<\/span>. The king escaped by night and succeeded in reaching the plains of Jericho but was captured there and taken to Riblah. Zedekiah’s family and counselors were killed; he himself was blinded and taken in chains to Babylon, where he died soon after (39:6-7).<\/p>\nBack in Jerusalem, Nebuzaradan, the Babylonian general, sent most of the Jews into captivity. Jeremiah, however, was granted special consideration; after being released from prison, he was placed under the care of Gedaliah, son of Ahikam.<\/p>\nAfter the Fall of Jerusalem<\/p>\nA month after the fall of Jerusalem, the city was burned and the walls broken down. Gedaliah was appointed governor of the remaining agricultural community, with headquarters at Mizpah. Jeremiah returned to Jerusalem, where, according to tradition, he took up his abode in a grotto near what is now known as Gordon’s Calvary. There he wrote the book of Lamentations.<\/p>\nThe Ammonite king Baalis, plotting rebellion against Babylon, instigated the murder of Gedaliah (40:13). In the reaction that followed, the remaining people followed the leader Johanan ben Kareah to a camp near Bethlehem, intending to go to Egypt. They asked Jeremiah, at Jerusalem, to give guidance from the Lord, promising obedience. Jeremiah’s message required that they remain in Israel and not go to Egypt. Disobedience was complete and immediate. Fearing Babylon, they departed from Judah, taking Jeremiah with them, and entered Egypt (41:16–43:7).<\/p>\nJeremiah did not stop his ministry in Egypt. His message at Tahpanhes (43:8-12) assured a victorious conquest of the land by Nebuchadnezzar, which took place in 568–567 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nJews from all parts of Egypt gathered to discuss their future as exiles. Jeremiah took the opportunity to denounce their idolatry. Jewish women as well as men argued that they had enjoyed prosperity while serving idols but had suffered since stopping. Jeremiah condemned their obdurate blindness to reality and gave God’s indictment. For a verifying sign, Jeremiah predicted that Pharaoh Hophra of Egypt would be assassinated (44:30), which happened in 466 BC<\/span>. No later record of Jeremiah’s acts exists in the Bible. Tradition says Jeremiah was stoned to death by the people of the Jewish exile settlement in Tahpanhes.<\/p>\nThough Jeremiah suffered continued rejection during his life, he has been honored by numerous apocryphal and traditional embellishments to his history. Jesus could well have had Jeremiah in mind when he said, “You build tombs for the prophets your ancestors killed and decorate the graves of the godly people your ancestors destroyed. . . . [You are] the descendants of those who murdered the prophets” (Mt 23:29-31, nlt<\/span>). See<\/em> Israel, History of; Jeremiah, Book of; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>\n<li>2. Family head in the Transjordan portion of Manasseh whom Tiglath-pileser took captive (1 Chr 5:23-26; cf. 2 Kgs 15:29).<\/li>\n<li>3. Father of Hamutal, a wife of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:31; 24:18).<\/li>\n<li>4. Ambidextrous Benjamite bowman and slinger who joined David at Ziklag (1 Chr 12:4).<\/li>\n<li>5, 6. Two Gadite soldiers who joined David’s army (1 Chr 12:10, 13).<\/li>\n<li>7. Postexilic priest who with Nehemiah set his seal to the covenant, renewing the people’s promise to obey God’s laws (Neh 10:2). He is mentioned again (12:34) as part of the procession for the dedication of the new wall of Jerusalem.<\/li>\n<li>8. Priest who returned from exile with Zerubbabel (Neh 12:1) and became head of a family of priests (v 12).<\/li>\n<li>9. Father of Jaazaniah, a Recabite who refused to drink wine (Jer 35:3).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JEREMIAH (Person<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Prophet to Judah before its fall in 586 BC<\/span>; his name is also spelled “Jeremias” (Mt 16:14) and “Jeremy” (Mt 2:17; 27:9) in the kjv<\/span>.<\/li>\nJeremiah was born in the village of Anathoth, about three miles (4.8 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem. His father’s name was Hilkiah, and he belonged to the tribe of Benjamin. His call came in the 13th year of King Josiah (640–609 BC<\/span>). He refers to himself as “a child” when called (Jer 1:6), but the Hebrew word is not the same as used in Jeremiah 30:6 and 31:8 and cannot be limited to preadolescence. He was probably referring to his inexperience rather than to his age. Jeremiah was born about 657 BC<\/span> during the reign of the wicked king Manasseh, while the great Ashurbanipal, who had shaken the world by sacking the ancient Egyptian city of Thebes in 663 BC<\/span>, ruled a world empire from Assyria.<\/p>\nGod informed Jeremiah that he had consecrated and appointed him before birth (Jer 1:4-5). Jeremiah first shrank with a sense of inadequacy and fear: “O Sovereign Lord<\/span>, . . . I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!” (v 6, nlt<\/span>). God would not allow Jeremiah to excuse himself. He was assured that words would be given him to speak, and guidance given for the way (v 7). He was promised protection (v 18) and deliverance (v 8) despite opposition (v 19). God touched his mouth, signifying divine inspiration of his words, and gave the sign of a branch from an almond tree, explaining that the Lord is watching (see nlt<\/span> mg). The third sign was the boiling pot (v 13) facing from the north, picturing the source and fury of impending disaster.<\/p>\nThus the tone of Jeremiah’s life ministry was set: judgment, disaster, danger, defeat, and impending death for the nation.<\/p>\nEarly Ministry<\/p>\nThe messages given by Jeremiah during his first five years of ministry may have been instrumental in the great revival of 622 BC<\/span>. Those cooperating with King Josiah in the reformation and friendly with Jeremiah included Ahikam and his father, Shaphan (Jer 26:24); Gedaliah, Ahikam’s son (39:14), who later became governor; Acbor, son of Micaiah, also called Abdon, whose son Elnathan joined the opposition (26:22) but later repented (36:25); and Asaiah (2 Chr 34:20). The prophets Nahum and Zephaniah also influenced the reform movement, which must have climaxed under the preaching of Habakkuk and Jeremiah, the priestly ministry of Hilkiah, and the prophecies of Huldah the prophetess. During the reign of King Josiah, Jeremiah spoke without the fear of persecution that plagued his later ministry. Though the content of the book of Jeremiah sometimes appears to be fragmentary, most of chapters 1–19 date to the time of Josiah.<\/p>\nThe finding of the lost Book of the Covenant in the temple debris may be the reason for the words in Jeremiah 15:16: “Your words are what sustain me. They bring me great joy and are my heart’s delight” (nlt<\/span>). The words “So be it, Lord<\/span>” (Jer 11:5) in a context recalling the words of Moses in the Torah may be Jeremiah’s response after hearing King Josiah read the newly found book.<\/p>\nSmall towns and rural areas, including his hometown, heard Jeremiah’s denunciation of high places and idolatry. They sought to kill the young prophet, or at least to intimidate him (11:21). Instead of being silent, Jeremiah asserted that his motivation was for their good and condemned their resistance to the truth as their greatest danger.<\/p>\nShortly after Jeremiah began his ministry, a number of world-changing events took place. Ashurbanipal died and the Assyrian Empire rapidly declined. Nabopolassar began a 21-year reign in Babylon, leading an expansion that culminated in his son Nebuchadnezzar’s subjugation of the known world. As the world news filtered in, Jeremiah turned more toward Jerusalem. His first temple speeches (chs 7–10) may have been uttered at this time.<\/p>\nNabopolassar felt his strength sufficient to launch an attack against Assyrian territory in 616 BC<\/span>, but he advanced cautiously because Psamtik I (Psammetichus) of Egypt appeared ready to aid Assyria. Cyaxares of Media pounced on Assyria when Babylon hesitated and took its most sacred city, Asshur, in 614 BC<\/span>. Babylon joined Media, along with Scythia, and waged an assault against Nineveh, which fell late in the summer of 612 BC<\/span>. The Assyrian Empire had shriveled to two small holdings, Haran and Carchemish.<\/p>\nNabopolassar took Haran in 610, and Ashuruballit, having escaped, appealed to Egypt for help at Carchemish. Neco, who had become pharaoh within the year, responded immediately. He marched through Judah without giving Josiah prior notice and asked that the Jews not bother him in view of his haste to go northward (2 Chr 35:21). Ignoring the request, Josiah pursued them to Megiddo and was wounded in the ensuing battle; he died in Jerusalem.<\/p>\nMinistry during the Reign of Jehoiakim<\/p>\nIn place of Jehoahaz, Josiah’s fourth son, who reigned only three months, Pharaoh Neco enthroned Jehoiakim (Eliakim). Neco demanded heavy indemnity payments from Judah and took Jehoahaz prisoner as collateral to assure payment (2 Kgs 23:31-33).<\/p>\nEarly in the reign of Jehoiakim, Jeremiah, moved by God’s Spirit, delivered his third temple speech (Jer 26) on the occasion of one of the annual Jewish feasts. He called for the people to repent and to act on the basis of the revelation they had heard repeatedly from the Book of the Law. The barb of the sermon came in the warning: “This is what the Lord<\/span> says: If you will not listen to me and obey the law I have given you, and if you will not listen to my servants, the prophets—for I sent them again and again to warn you, but you would not listen to them—then I will destroy this Temple as I destroyed Shiloh, the place where the Tabernacle was located. And I will make Jerusalem an object of cursing in every nation on earth” (26:4-6, nlt<\/span>). Shiloh had been the heart of Jewish worship from Joshua to Samuel, but after being destroyed by the Philistines, it never revived. It served as an example of complete desolation following God’s judgment in the days of Eli.<\/p>\nCrowds gathered rapidly and reacted angrily against Jeremiah. Priests and princes hurried to the New Gate, where a court was established to bring order and to control violence. Jehoiakim would be no help to Jeremiah, for he had refused to listen to God’s messages (Jer 22:21). The priests and false prophets spoke against Jeremiah, calling him a traitor. Then some of the elders spoke to the people about Uriah, who had prophesied the same message. Rather than risk disaster, Ahikam persuaded the court to spare Jeremiah.<\/p>\nEgypt controlled Palestine and Syria after the decay of the Assyrian Empire. In 606 BC<\/span> Egypt succeeded in annihilating a garrison city of Babylonian soldiers south of Carchemish and then reoccupied Carchemish to await the return blow from Babylon. This Egyptian victory meant persecution for Jeremiah, who was often accused of false prophecy (cf. Jer 20).<\/p>\nJeremiah never had confidence in Egypt. Each time a Jewish leader would call for a new alliance with Egypt, Jeremiah repeated God’s message against it. Whenever a Jewish group fled to Egypt for security, Jeremiah warned of worse things in that land of false refuge (see Jer 44:26-27). Jeremiah’s ode and prophecy in chapter 46 poetically describe Egypt’s defeat at Carchemish, when Nabopolassar sent his son Nebuchadnezzar to destroy them (605 BC<\/span>). After smashing the Egyptian army at Carchemish, Nebuchadnezzar pursued the enemy through Judah. “Not a single man escaped to his own country,” reads the exaggerated Babylonian record. His father’s death, however, prevented him from invading Egypt, and he returned to Babylon to assume the throne. The following year Nebuchadnezzar, now king of Babylonia, returned to accept the homage of the rulers of Judah, Syria, and Phoenicia. On this occasion God gave Jeremiah his great 70-year prophecy (Jer 25:11-12), which became the basis of Daniel 9:2, 24-27.<\/p>\nA year after the decisive battle at Carchemish, Baruch, Jeremiah’s scribe, finished recording all the dictated words of Jeremiah and was reading from this scroll at the temple. A report reached the king, who sent Jehudi, a servant, to fetch the scroll and read it to him. When this was done, Jehoiakim burned the scroll in spite of his counselors, who pleaded that the king not do it (Jer 36:23-25). God’s message, soon rewritten, added a promise of fearful judgment on Jehoiakim (vv 27-31).<\/p>\nAmbitious young Nebuchadnezzar determined to add Egypt to his dominion. In 601 BC<\/span> he led his forces through Judah again, but Neco had advance warning and was prepared for the onslaught. In the desert of Shur, Nebuchadnezzar suffered defeat. Encouraged by this display of Egyptian defensive strength, the pro-Egyptian parties in Judah asserted themselves, persuading Jehoiakim to lead them to freedom from Babylon by making an alliance with Egypt (2 Kgs 24:1). But help from Egypt did not come (v 7).<\/p>\nIn 599 BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar armed those surrounding the rebel Jewish kingdom to harass the Jews, which they willingly did (2 Kgs 24:2). Evidently Jehoiakim lost his life in one of these raids. Since the people despised him, his body was thrown out without honorable burial, as Jeremiah had predicted (Jer 22:19).<\/p>\nMinistry during the Reign of Zedekiah<\/p>\nNebuchadnezzar’s siege of Jerusalem in 598 BC<\/span> lasted only a short time because the new king, Jehoiachin, crowned at age 18, knew resistance was useless. He gave himself up, with all his family and court, in March of 597 BC<\/span>, after serving as king about three months. The Babylonian Chronicle reads: “He [Nebuchadnezzar] seized the city and captured the king.”<\/p>\nJehoiachin was carried to Babylon along with 8,000 (2 Kgs 24:16; cf. v 14) officers, artisans, and executives (Ezekiel among them) and much booty. In his place Nebuchadnezzar appointed Zedekiah, Jehoiachin’s uncle, to rule. Zedekiah proceeded to organize his government with the less capable and inexperienced help left after the deportation.<\/p>\nJeremiah took up his thankless ministry, calling on the Jews to believe God, obey the laws of Babylon, and reject false hopes in Egypt. Zedekiah turned a deaf ear to these appeals, listening rather to the unwise advice of his counselors (Jer 37:1-2). During the first year of Zedekiah’s rule, Jeremiah received the vision of the two baskets of figs. The Jews carried to Babylon were like good figs, while Zedekiah and those who trusted in Egypt were like rotten figs (24:1-8). The reason for this reproachful description was that the Jews began plotting rebellion against Babylon along with Edom, Moab, Ammon, Tyre, and Sidon from the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah (27:1-3), thus breaking their oath of loyalty to Nebuchadnezzar and repudiating God’s message through Jeremiah.<\/p>\nIn Egypt the pharaoh began to renew plans to organize dissidents within the Babylonian Empire to revolt. He hired Jewish soldiers to aid him in protecting his southern border. The Jewish soldiers settled on a Nile island called Elephantine, or Yeb (593–410 BC<\/span>). Jeremiah addressed an oracle to these Jews (ch 44). The treaty for Jews to help in Egypt evidently also assumed that Egyptians would aid Israel. When the Babylonians besieged Jerusalem in 589, Pharaoh Hophra came to the aid of Zedekiah. Nebuchadnezzar, ruling from Riblah, commanded that the siege against Jerusalem be lifted in order to make a surprise attack on Hophra (37:5). The release gave Jeremiah an opportunity to journey to Anathoth to secure some family property (v 12). However, Irijah, captain of the guard, arrested Jeremiah in the Gate of Benjamin for defecting to the enemy, and he was beaten and flung into a dungeon. King Zedekiah brought him out after many days to obtain a prognostication. With characteristic boldness, Jeremiah told the king he would shortly become a captive. At the same time, Jeremiah requested relief from injustice for himself. He gained part of his request but continued as prisoner in the court of the guard.<\/p>\nThe Babylonian army chased Pharaoh Hophra back to Egypt and returned to crush Jerusalem without further mercy. The siege, which began in 589 BC<\/span>, was restored with rigor in January of 588, Zedekiah’s ninth year (39:1). During this time, the Lord gave Jeremiah foreknowledge of a visit from a cousin who wished to sell a field near Anathoth (32:7-9; cf. 37:12). Jeremiah bought the field as an object lesson to verify the message of restoration after a captivity of 70 years (29:10).<\/p>\nThe armies of Babylon cut off all supplies from Jerusalem and were able to destroy the last two outlying Jewish fortresses of Lachish and Azekah (34:7). Food became scarce. Disease spread. Undisposed-of sewage and impure cistern water caused pestilence. With increased distress came Jeremiah’s increased appeal for the city to surrender.<\/p>\nJeremiah remained in the prison court until the Babylonians breached the city wall in July of 586 BC<\/span>. The king escaped by night and succeeded in reaching the plains of Jericho but was captured there and taken to Riblah. Zedekiah’s family and counselors were killed; he himself was blinded and taken in chains to Babylon, where he died soon after (39:6-7).<\/p>\nBack in Jerusalem, Nebuzaradan, the Babylonian general, sent most of the Jews into captivity. Jeremiah, however, was granted special consideration; after being released from prison, he was placed under the care of Gedaliah, son of Ahikam.<\/p>\nAfter the Fall of Jerusalem<\/p>\nA month after the fall of Jerusalem, the city was burned and the walls broken down. Gedaliah was appointed governor of the remaining agricultural community, with headquarters at Mizpah. Jeremiah returned to Jerusalem, where, according to tradition, he took up his abode in a grotto near what is now known as Gordon’s Calvary. There he wrote the book of Lamentations.<\/p>\nThe Ammonite king Baalis, plotting rebellion against Babylon, instigated the murder of Gedaliah (40:13). In the reaction that followed, the remaining people followed the leader Johanan ben Kareah to a camp near Bethlehem, intending to go to Egypt. They asked Jeremiah, at Jerusalem, to give guidance from the Lord, promising obedience. Jeremiah’s message required that they remain in Israel and not go to Egypt. Disobedience was complete and immediate. Fearing Babylon, they departed from Judah, taking Jeremiah with them, and entered Egypt (41:16–43:7).<\/p>\nJeremiah did not stop his ministry in Egypt. His message at Tahpanhes (43:8-12) assured a victorious conquest of the land by Nebuchadnezzar, which took place in 568–567 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nJews from all parts of Egypt gathered to discuss their future as exiles. Jeremiah took the opportunity to denounce their idolatry. Jewish women as well as men argued that they had enjoyed prosperity while serving idols but had suffered since stopping. Jeremiah condemned their obdurate blindness to reality and gave God’s indictment. For a verifying sign, Jeremiah predicted that Pharaoh Hophra of Egypt would be assassinated (44:30), which happened in 466 BC<\/span>. No later record of Jeremiah’s acts exists in the Bible. Tradition says Jeremiah was stoned to death by the people of the Jewish exile settlement in Tahpanhes.<\/p>\nThough Jeremiah suffered continued rejection during his life, he has been honored by numerous apocryphal and traditional embellishments to his history. Jesus could well have had Jeremiah in mind when he said, “You build tombs for the prophets your ancestors killed and decorate the graves of the godly people your ancestors destroyed. . . . [You are] the descendants of those who murdered the prophets” (Mt 23:29-31, nlt<\/span>). See<\/em> Israel, History of; Jeremiah, Book of; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>\n<li>2. Family head in the Transjordan portion of Manasseh whom Tiglath-pileser took captive (1 Chr 5:23-26; cf. 2 Kgs 15:29).<\/li>\n<li>3. Father of Hamutal, a wife of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:31; 24:18).<\/li>\n<li>4. Ambidextrous Benjamite bowman and slinger who joined David at Ziklag (1 Chr 12:4).<\/li>\n<li>5, 6. Two Gadite soldiers who joined David’s army (1 Chr 12:10, 13).<\/li>\n<li>7. Postexilic priest who with Nehemiah set his seal to the covenant, renewing the people’s promise to obey God’s laws (Neh 10:2). He is mentioned again (12:34) as part of the procession for the dedication of the new wall of Jerusalem.<\/li>\n<li>8. Priest who returned from exile with Zerubbabel (Neh 12:1) and became head of a family of priests (v 12).<\/li>\n<li>9. Father of Jaazaniah, a Recabite who refused to drink wine (Jer 35:3).<\/li>","summary_ro":"JEREMIAH (Person) 1. Prophet to Judah before its fall in 586 BC; his name is also spelled “Jeremias” (Mt 16:14) and “Jeremy” (Mt 2:17; 27:9) in the kjv. Jeremiah was born in the village of Anathoth, about three miles (4.8 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem. His father’s name was Hilkiah, and he belonged to the tribe of Benjamin. His call came in the 13th year of King Josiah (640–609 BC). He refers to himself as “a child” when called (Jer 1:6), but the Hebrew word is not the same as used in Je...","summary_en":"JEREMIAH (Person) 1. Prophet to Judah before its fall in 586 BC; his name is also spelled “Jeremias” (Mt 16:14) and “Jeremy” (Mt 2:17; 27:9) in the kjv. Jeremiah was born in the village of Anathoth, about three miles (4.8 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem. His father’s name was Hilkiah, and he belonged to the tribe of Benjamin. His call came in the 13th year of King Josiah (640–609 BC). He refers to himself as “a child” when called (Jer 1:6), but the Hebrew word is not the same as used in Je...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52512,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:8","content_ro":"31:8<\/strong> The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company<\/em> of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC<\/span> numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).<\/p>","content_en":"31:8<\/strong> The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company<\/em> of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC<\/span> numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:8 The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).","summary_en":"31:8 The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80138,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:8","content_ro":"31:8<\/strong> The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company<\/em> of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC<\/span> numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).<\/p>","content_en":"31:8<\/strong> The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company<\/em> of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC<\/span> numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:8 The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).","summary_en":"31:8 The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107764,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:8","content_ro":"31:8<\/strong> The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company<\/em> of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC<\/span> numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).<\/p>","content_en":"31:8<\/strong> The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company<\/em> of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC<\/span> numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:8 The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).","summary_en":"31:8 The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135390,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:8","content_ro":"31:8<\/strong> The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company<\/em> of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC<\/span> numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).<\/p>","content_en":"31:8<\/strong> The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company<\/em> of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC<\/span> numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:8 The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).","summary_en":"31:8 The Lord promised to gather the surviving exiles from wherever they were scattered without overlooking the weak and helpless. • The great company of exiles who returned in 538–536 BC numbered 49,697 (Ezra 2:64).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":35781,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of God","title_en":"Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF GOD<\/h3>\nTerm used to express the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as the unique divine Son.<\/p>\nJesus’ unique sonship is antithetical to concepts of sonship popular in the ancient world. In Hellenism, people believed a man could be a “son of the gods” in many ways: in mythology, by cohabitation of a god with a woman whose offspring was imagined to be superhuman; in politics, by giving generals and emperors high honors in the cult of Roman emperor worship; in medicine, by calling a doctor “son of Asclepius”; and eventually by ascribing to anyone with mysterious powers or qualities the title or reputation of “divine man.”<\/p>\nThe Term in the Old Testament<\/p>\nIn the OT, certain men who lived before the time of Noah (Gn 6:1-4), “the angels” (including Satan, Jb 1:6; 2:1), and other heavenly beings (Pss 29:1; 82:6; 89:6, rsv<\/span> mg) are called “sons of God.” Israel as a people was the chosen son of God. This corporate sonship became the basis of Israel’s redemption from Egypt: “Israel is my first-born son” (Ex 4:22; cf. Jer 31:9). Corporate sonship was the context for focus on personal sonship in the divine sanction of David as king: “I will be his father, and he will be my son” (2 Sm 7:14). David’s “adoptive” sonship was by divine decree: “I will proclaim the decree: . . . ‘You are my son; today I have become your Father’ ” (Ps 2:7); and it was the prophetic prototype of the “essential” sonship of Jesus, David’s royal son (Mt 3:17; Mk 1:11; Lk 3:22; Acts 13:33; Heb 1:5; 5:5). Other messianic prophecies ascribe divine names to the Davidic Messiah: “Immanuel” (Is 7:13-14) and “Mighty God, Everlasting Father” (Is 9:6-7). These are fulfilled in Jesus (Mt 1:23; 21:4-10; 22:41-45).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as the Son of God is revealed in the Gospels in three distinct ways.<\/p>\nThe first is his eternal, personal sonship.<\/em> Jesus’ personal sonship is revealed in Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16) and in Jesus’ identification of himself at his trial: “ ‘Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?’ . . . ‘I am,’ said Jesus” (Mk 14:61-62). In both instances, the issue is his personal being or essence, his eternal identity.<\/p>\nLong before Creation, even from eternity, the Father and the Son enjoyed fellowship with each other. We know this because the Bible tells us so—but not in any great detail. For the most part, the Scriptures are silent about the premundane scene. And yet there are a few verses that lift the veil slightly and give us a glimpse into that sublime, divine relationship that always existed between the Father and the Son.<\/p>\nOf all the books in the Bible, the Gospel of John has the most to say about the relationship between the Father and the Son. It is from John’s inspired pen that we read from the outset, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” This is a rather flat rendering. The Greek conveys something more picturesque: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was face to face with God, and the Word was himself God.” Imagine, the Word, who was the preincarnate Son of God, was face to face with God. The expression “face to face” translates the Greek preposition pros<\/span> (short for prosopon pros prosopon<\/span>,<\/em> “face to face,” a common expression in koine Greek.) The expression signifies intimate fellowship. The Father and Son enjoyed such an intimate fellowship from eternity. How they must have delighted in each other!<\/p>\nAfter the Son of God became a man and began his ministry on earth, he referred to the relationship he enjoyed with the Father before the foundation of the world. Jesus spoke of what he had seen and heard together with the Father before coming to earth (see John 3:13 and 8:38). Jesus longed to return to that glorious sphere. In his prayer before going to the cross (in ch 17), he asked the Father to glorify him with the glory he had with the Father before the world was (v 5). Jesus wanted to recapture his primordial equality with the Father—something he had willingly relinquished for the sake of his Father’s plan (see Phil 2:6-7). As he prayed to the Father, a wonderful utterance escaped from his lips: “Father, . . . you loved me before the foundation of the world” (Jn 17:24). God’s Son, the unique Son, was the single object of the Father’s love.<\/p>\nThe second aspect of Jesus’ sonship is his nativity sonship.<\/em> The nativity of Jesus is traced to the direct, spiritual paternity of God. Jesus is the Son of God because his incarnation and birth into the human race was created by the Holy Spirit. In Matthew, Jesus’ conception “is of the Holy Spirit” (Mt 1:20). He is to be named “Jesus” (meaning Yahweh is salvation) “because he will save his people from their sins” (v 21), and “Immanuel” (God with us) because he is himself the Son of God in human flesh (v 23). In Luke, Jesus’ conception was by the Holy Spirit and the power of the Most High (Lk 1:31, 35), so Jesus was called “the Son of God” (v 35). If the father of Jesus had been the man Joseph, he would have been called “Jesus, the son of Joseph.” Luke’s teaching clearly means that since the Spirit of God was the father of Jesus, this son of the virgin Mary is properly called “Jesus, the Son of God.”<\/p>\nThe third aspect is his messianic sonship.<\/em> Jesus is the Father’s Son and representative, whose earthly mission is to establish the kingdom of God. At his baptism, he began his mission with the Father’s coronation: “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased” (Mt 3:17; cf. Ps 2:7). Jesus received a similar pronouncement from heaven at his Transfiguration (Lk 9:35). As the messianic Son, Jesus perfectly completed the redeeming work given him to do by his Father.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament Epistles<\/p>\nPaul spoke of the essential, ontological sonship of Jesus—not as an isolated fact, but in the context of his redemptive work. It was as God’s Son that Jesus took human nature (Rom 1:3) and as “the Son of God” that he was resurrected and enthroned in power (Mt 28:18; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:28). The Incarnation is spoken of as “God sending his own Son” (Rom 8:3; Gal 4:4) for humanity’s redemption, a redemption that was accomplished “through the death of his Son” (Rom 5:10; 8:29, 32). As a consequence, believers can have “fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Cor 1:9), and they can live by faith in “the Son of God” (Gal 2:20). Paul’s first preaching was “that Jesus is the Son of God” (Acts 9:20); this was later expounded by Paul in the light of Psalm 2:7 (see Acts 13:33).<\/p>\nIn Hebrews, Jesus is “the Son,” who is God’s “firstborn” and personal “heir,” who is creator and sustainer of the universe, and who is the “radiance of God’s glory” (Heb 1:2-12; 3:6; 5:5). As the Son, he is the final and eternal High Priest who ascended to heaven and whose mediatorial work remains perfect forever (4:14; 6:6; 7:3, 28). In 1 John 4 and 5, belief in Jesus as the incarnate Son of God is essential for salvation; disbelief comes from the spirit of the Antichrist.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of Man.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF GOD<\/h3>\nTerm used to express the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as the unique divine Son.<\/p>\nJesus’ unique sonship is antithetical to concepts of sonship popular in the ancient world. In Hellenism, people believed a man could be a “son of the gods” in many ways: in mythology, by cohabitation of a god with a woman whose offspring was imagined to be superhuman; in politics, by giving generals and emperors high honors in the cult of Roman emperor worship; in medicine, by calling a doctor “son of Asclepius”; and eventually by ascribing to anyone with mysterious powers or qualities the title or reputation of “divine man.”<\/p>\nThe Term in the Old Testament<\/p>\nIn the OT, certain men who lived before the time of Noah (Gn 6:1-4), “the angels” (including Satan, Jb 1:6; 2:1), and other heavenly beings (Pss 29:1; 82:6; 89:6, rsv<\/span> mg) are called “sons of God.” Israel as a people was the chosen son of God. This corporate sonship became the basis of Israel’s redemption from Egypt: “Israel is my first-born son” (Ex 4:22; cf. Jer 31:9). Corporate sonship was the context for focus on personal sonship in the divine sanction of David as king: “I will be his father, and he will be my son” (2 Sm 7:14). David’s “adoptive” sonship was by divine decree: “I will proclaim the decree: . . . ‘You are my son; today I have become your Father’ ” (Ps 2:7); and it was the prophetic prototype of the “essential” sonship of Jesus, David’s royal son (Mt 3:17; Mk 1:11; Lk 3:22; Acts 13:33; Heb 1:5; 5:5). Other messianic prophecies ascribe divine names to the Davidic Messiah: “Immanuel” (Is 7:13-14) and “Mighty God, Everlasting Father” (Is 9:6-7). These are fulfilled in Jesus (Mt 1:23; 21:4-10; 22:41-45).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as the Son of God is revealed in the Gospels in three distinct ways.<\/p>\nThe first is his eternal, personal sonship.<\/em> Jesus’ personal sonship is revealed in Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16) and in Jesus’ identification of himself at his trial: “ ‘Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?’ . . . ‘I am,’ said Jesus” (Mk 14:61-62). In both instances, the issue is his personal being or essence, his eternal identity.<\/p>\nLong before Creation, even from eternity, the Father and the Son enjoyed fellowship with each other. We know this because the Bible tells us so—but not in any great detail. For the most part, the Scriptures are silent about the premundane scene. And yet there are a few verses that lift the veil slightly and give us a glimpse into that sublime, divine relationship that always existed between the Father and the Son.<\/p>\nOf all the books in the Bible, the Gospel of John has the most to say about the relationship between the Father and the Son. It is from John’s inspired pen that we read from the outset, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” This is a rather flat rendering. The Greek conveys something more picturesque: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was face to face with God, and the Word was himself God.” Imagine, the Word, who was the preincarnate Son of God, was face to face with God. The expression “face to face” translates the Greek preposition pros<\/span> (short for prosopon pros prosopon<\/span>,<\/em> “face to face,” a common expression in koine Greek.) The expression signifies intimate fellowship. The Father and Son enjoyed such an intimate fellowship from eternity. How they must have delighted in each other!<\/p>\nAfter the Son of God became a man and began his ministry on earth, he referred to the relationship he enjoyed with the Father before the foundation of the world. Jesus spoke of what he had seen and heard together with the Father before coming to earth (see John 3:13 and 8:38). Jesus longed to return to that glorious sphere. In his prayer before going to the cross (in ch 17), he asked the Father to glorify him with the glory he had with the Father before the world was (v 5). Jesus wanted to recapture his primordial equality with the Father—something he had willingly relinquished for the sake of his Father’s plan (see Phil 2:6-7). As he prayed to the Father, a wonderful utterance escaped from his lips: “Father, . . . you loved me before the foundation of the world” (Jn 17:24). God’s Son, the unique Son, was the single object of the Father’s love.<\/p>\nThe second aspect of Jesus’ sonship is his nativity sonship.<\/em> The nativity of Jesus is traced to the direct, spiritual paternity of God. Jesus is the Son of God because his incarnation and birth into the human race was created by the Holy Spirit. In Matthew, Jesus’ conception “is of the Holy Spirit” (Mt 1:20). He is to be named “Jesus” (meaning Yahweh is salvation) “because he will save his people from their sins” (v 21), and “Immanuel” (God with us) because he is himself the Son of God in human flesh (v 23). In Luke, Jesus’ conception was by the Holy Spirit and the power of the Most High (Lk 1:31, 35), so Jesus was called “the Son of God” (v 35). If the father of Jesus had been the man Joseph, he would have been called “Jesus, the son of Joseph.” Luke’s teaching clearly means that since the Spirit of God was the father of Jesus, this son of the virgin Mary is properly called “Jesus, the Son of God.”<\/p>\nThe third aspect is his messianic sonship.<\/em> Jesus is the Father’s Son and representative, whose earthly mission is to establish the kingdom of God. At his baptism, he began his mission with the Father’s coronation: “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased” (Mt 3:17; cf. Ps 2:7). Jesus received a similar pronouncement from heaven at his Transfiguration (Lk 9:35). As the messianic Son, Jesus perfectly completed the redeeming work given him to do by his Father.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament Epistles<\/p>\nPaul spoke of the essential, ontological sonship of Jesus—not as an isolated fact, but in the context of his redemptive work. It was as God’s Son that Jesus took human nature (Rom 1:3) and as “the Son of God” that he was resurrected and enthroned in power (Mt 28:18; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:28). The Incarnation is spoken of as “God sending his own Son” (Rom 8:3; Gal 4:4) for humanity’s redemption, a redemption that was accomplished “through the death of his Son” (Rom 5:10; 8:29, 32). As a consequence, believers can have “fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Cor 1:9), and they can live by faith in “the Son of God” (Gal 2:20). Paul’s first preaching was “that Jesus is the Son of God” (Acts 9:20); this was later expounded by Paul in the light of Psalm 2:7 (see Acts 13:33).<\/p>\nIn Hebrews, Jesus is “the Son,” who is God’s “firstborn” and personal “heir,” who is creator and sustainer of the universe, and who is the “radiance of God’s glory” (Heb 1:2-12; 3:6; 5:5). As the Son, he is the final and eternal High Priest who ascended to heaven and whose mediatorial work remains perfect forever (4:14; 6:6; 7:3, 28). In 1 John 4 and 5, belief in Jesus as the incarnate Son of God is essential for salvation; disbelief comes from the spirit of the Antichrist.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of Man.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF GOD Term used to express the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as the unique divine Son. Jesus’ unique sonship is antithetical to concepts of sonship popular in the ancient world. In Hellenism, people believed a man could be a “son of the gods” in many ways: in mythology, by cohabitation of a god with a woman whose offspring was imagined to be superhuman; in politics, by giving generals and emperors high honors in the cult of Roman emperor worship; in medicine, by calling a doctor “son of Asc...","summary_en":"SON OF GOD Term used to express the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as the unique divine Son. Jesus’ unique sonship is antithetical to concepts of sonship popular in the ancient world. In Hellenism, people believed a man could be a “son of the gods” in many ways: in mythology, by cohabitation of a god with a woman whose offspring was imagined to be superhuman; in politics, by giving generals and emperors high honors in the cult of Roman emperor worship; in medicine, by calling a doctor “son of Asc...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52513,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:9","content_ro":"31:9<\/strong> Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy<\/em>,<\/em> knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:9<\/strong> Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy<\/em>,<\/em> knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:9 Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy, knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father.","summary_en":"31:9 Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy, knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80139,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:9","content_ro":"31:9<\/strong> Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy<\/em>,<\/em> knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:9<\/strong> Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy<\/em>,<\/em> knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:9 Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy, knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father.","summary_en":"31:9 Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy, knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107765,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:9","content_ro":"31:9<\/strong> Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy<\/em>,<\/em> knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:9<\/strong> Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy<\/em>,<\/em> knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:9 Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy, knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father.","summary_en":"31:9 Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy, knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135391,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:9","content_ro":"31:9<\/strong> Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy<\/em>,<\/em> knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:9<\/strong> Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy<\/em>,<\/em> knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:9 Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy, knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father.","summary_en":"31:9 Those returning to their homeland would cry for joy, knowing the Lord as their shepherd (Ps 23:1-3) and feeling secure (see Isa 35:10) with God as their father.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65399,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93025,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120651,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148277,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":34993,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Shepherd","title_en":"Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>SHEPHERD<\/h3>\nOne who took complete care of a flock of sheep. His task was to find grass and water for the sheep, to protect them from wild animals (Am 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ez 34:8; Mt 18:12), to lead the flock out of the fold each day, and to return the flock to the fold at the close of the day (Jn 10:2-4).<\/p>\nThe figure of the shepherd and his sheep is important in the NT. Jesus is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (Mt 18:10-14; Mk 6:34; Jn 10; Heb 13:20). The analogy of the shepherd and the flock finds rich expression in Psalm 23, Ezekiel 34, and John 10. God was the Shepherd of Israel (Gn 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Is 40:11). When unfaithful shepherds failed Israel, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd over them (Ez 34:11-16, 23-24).<\/p>\nThe NT imagery comes from an OT and Palestinian background. In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a responsible position. Great flocks had to be moved from place to place, and it was necessary that they be guarded from wild animals and robbers. Because of the fundamental role of shepherding in the ancient world, the word “shepherd” became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This imagery formed the background for the OT, where the same usage is found. God is pictured as the shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare. Rulers and leaders of the people are often referred to as shepherds (Nm 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 12:10; 22:22; 23:1-2).<\/p>\nBy the time of Jeremiah, “shepherd” began to be used as a title for the coming Messiah. God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ez 34:11-22) and promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). He explicitly promised that he would be their God and would set the messianic Son of David as shepherd over them (Ez 34:23-24). In the NT Jesus referred to himself as the promised messianic Shepherd (Mt 10:16; 25:32; Mk 14:27; Jn 10:1-30; cf. Heb 13:20; 1 Pt 2:25). Ephesians 4:11 speaks of leaders of the church as shepherds or pastors, and this usage continued in the early church and down until the present day. Paul said they are special people given to the church by God to care for God’s people as a shepherd does his sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. Peter also spoke of the leaders as shepherds; he encouraged them to remain faithful shepherds until the time that the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appeared (1 Pt 5:1-4).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SHEPHERD<\/h3>\nOne who took complete care of a flock of sheep. His task was to find grass and water for the sheep, to protect them from wild animals (Am 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ez 34:8; Mt 18:12), to lead the flock out of the fold each day, and to return the flock to the fold at the close of the day (Jn 10:2-4).<\/p>\nThe figure of the shepherd and his sheep is important in the NT. Jesus is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (Mt 18:10-14; Mk 6:34; Jn 10; Heb 13:20). The analogy of the shepherd and the flock finds rich expression in Psalm 23, Ezekiel 34, and John 10. God was the Shepherd of Israel (Gn 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Is 40:11). When unfaithful shepherds failed Israel, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd over them (Ez 34:11-16, 23-24).<\/p>\nThe NT imagery comes from an OT and Palestinian background. In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a responsible position. Great flocks had to be moved from place to place, and it was necessary that they be guarded from wild animals and robbers. Because of the fundamental role of shepherding in the ancient world, the word “shepherd” became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This imagery formed the background for the OT, where the same usage is found. God is pictured as the shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare. Rulers and leaders of the people are often referred to as shepherds (Nm 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 12:10; 22:22; 23:1-2).<\/p>\nBy the time of Jeremiah, “shepherd” began to be used as a title for the coming Messiah. God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ez 34:11-22) and promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). He explicitly promised that he would be their God and would set the messianic Son of David as shepherd over them (Ez 34:23-24). In the NT Jesus referred to himself as the promised messianic Shepherd (Mt 10:16; 25:32; Mk 14:27; Jn 10:1-30; cf. Heb 13:20; 1 Pt 2:25). Ephesians 4:11 speaks of leaders of the church as shepherds or pastors, and this usage continued in the early church and down until the present day. Paul said they are special people given to the church by God to care for God’s people as a shepherd does his sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. Peter also spoke of the leaders as shepherds; he encouraged them to remain faithful shepherds until the time that the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appeared (1 Pt 5:1-4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SHEPHERD One who took complete care of a flock of sheep. His task was to find grass and water for the sheep, to protect them from wild animals (Am 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ez 34:8; Mt 18:12), to lead the flock out of the fold each day, and to return the flock to the fold at the close of the day (Jn 10:2-4). The figure of the shepherd and his sheep is important in the NT. Jesus is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (Mt 18:10-14; Mk 6:34; Jn 10; Heb 13:...","summary_en":"SHEPHERD One who took complete care of a flock of sheep. His task was to find grass and water for the sheep, to protect them from wild animals (Am 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ez 34:8; Mt 18:12), to lead the flock out of the fold each day, and to return the flock to the fold at the close of the day (Jn 10:2-4). The figure of the shepherd and his sheep is important in the NT. Jesus is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (Mt 18:10-14; Mk 6:34; Jn 10; Heb 13:...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52514,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:10","content_ro":"31:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> promised to gather<\/em> his people from the nations of the world<\/em> and be their shepherd<\/em> in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.<\/p>","content_en":"31:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> promised to gather<\/em> his people from the nations of the world<\/em> and be their shepherd<\/em> in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:10 The Lord promised to gather his people from the nations of the world and be their shepherd in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.","summary_en":"31:10 The Lord promised to gather his people from the nations of the world and be their shepherd in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80140,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:10","content_ro":"31:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> promised to gather<\/em> his people from the nations of the world<\/em> and be their shepherd<\/em> in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.<\/p>","content_en":"31:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> promised to gather<\/em> his people from the nations of the world<\/em> and be their shepherd<\/em> in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:10 The Lord promised to gather his people from the nations of the world and be their shepherd in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.","summary_en":"31:10 The Lord promised to gather his people from the nations of the world and be their shepherd in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107766,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:10","content_ro":"31:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> promised to gather<\/em> his people from the nations of the world<\/em> and be their shepherd<\/em> in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.<\/p>","content_en":"31:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> promised to gather<\/em> his people from the nations of the world<\/em> and be their shepherd<\/em> in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:10 The Lord promised to gather his people from the nations of the world and be their shepherd in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.","summary_en":"31:10 The Lord promised to gather his people from the nations of the world and be their shepherd in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135392,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:10","content_ro":"31:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> promised to gather<\/em> his people from the nations of the world<\/em> and be their shepherd<\/em> in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.<\/p>","content_en":"31:10<\/strong> The<\/em> Lord<\/span> promised to gather<\/em> his people from the nations of the world<\/em> and be their shepherd<\/em> in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:10 The Lord promised to gather his people from the nations of the world and be their shepherd in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.","summary_en":"31:10 The Lord promised to gather his people from the nations of the world and be their shepherd in place of the wicked shepherds who had led Israel and Judah astray.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62732,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Shepherd","title_en":"The Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\nIn the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\nThe word shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\nThe leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\nIn the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\nThe word shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\nThe leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","summary_en":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64096,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Order","title_en":"The New Order","content_ro":"<h3>The New Order<\/h3>\nIsaiah differentiates the old order,<\/em> the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order,<\/em> a new creation where justice and harmony triumph.<\/p>\nThe old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride.<\/p>\nIsaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the new order in this life, such as God’s comfort (40:1), salvation (45:22), joy (24:14-15), righteousness (24:16), peace (26:3), divine blessing, and protection. Other dimensions lie beyond our experience: the end of death (25:7-8); the resurrection (26:19); the cessation of enmity, corruption, and evil (60:18; 65:25); the full enjoyment of God’s presence (60:19); and God’s uncontested rule in his eternal kingdom (see Rev 21–22). These are things that those who trust in God look forward to in the coming age.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1; 24:14-16; 25:7-8; 26:19; 30:26; 43:18-19; 60:18-19; 62:2; 65:17-25; Jer 23:7-8; 31:10-14; 2 Cor 3:6-11; 5:17; Heb 12:18-24; Rev 21:1–22:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Order<\/h3>\nIsaiah differentiates the old order,<\/em> the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order,<\/em> a new creation where justice and harmony triumph.<\/p>\nThe old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride.<\/p>\nIsaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the new order in this life, such as God’s comfort (40:1), salvation (45:22), joy (24:14-15), righteousness (24:16), peace (26:3), divine blessing, and protection. Other dimensions lie beyond our experience: the end of death (25:7-8); the resurrection (26:19); the cessation of enmity, corruption, and evil (60:18; 65:25); the full enjoyment of God’s presence (60:19); and God’s uncontested rule in his eternal kingdom (see Rev 21–22). These are things that those who trust in God look forward to in the coming age.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1; 24:14-16; 25:7-8; 26:19; 30:26; 43:18-19; 60:18-19; 62:2; 65:17-25; Jer 23:7-8; 31:10-14; 2 Cor 3:6-11; 5:17; Heb 12:18-24; Rev 21:1–22:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Order Isaiah differentiates the old order, the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order, a new creation where justice and harmony triumph. The old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride. Isaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the...","summary_en":"The New Order Isaiah differentiates the old order, the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order, a new creation where justice and harmony triumph. The old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride. Isaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":90358,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Shepherd","title_en":"The Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\nIn the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\nThe word shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\nThe leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\nIn the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\nThe word shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\nThe leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","summary_en":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91722,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Order","title_en":"The New Order","content_ro":"<h3>The New Order<\/h3>\nIsaiah differentiates the old order,<\/em> the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order,<\/em> a new creation where justice and harmony triumph.<\/p>\nThe old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride.<\/p>\nIsaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the new order in this life, such as God’s comfort (40:1), salvation (45:22), joy (24:14-15), righteousness (24:16), peace (26:3), divine blessing, and protection. Other dimensions lie beyond our experience: the end of death (25:7-8); the resurrection (26:19); the cessation of enmity, corruption, and evil (60:18; 65:25); the full enjoyment of God’s presence (60:19); and God’s uncontested rule in his eternal kingdom (see Rev 21–22). These are things that those who trust in God look forward to in the coming age.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1; 24:14-16; 25:7-8; 26:19; 30:26; 43:18-19; 60:18-19; 62:2; 65:17-25; Jer 23:7-8; 31:10-14; 2 Cor 3:6-11; 5:17; Heb 12:18-24; Rev 21:1–22:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Order<\/h3>\nIsaiah differentiates the old order,<\/em> the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order,<\/em> a new creation where justice and harmony triumph.<\/p>\nThe old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride.<\/p>\nIsaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the new order in this life, such as God’s comfort (40:1), salvation (45:22), joy (24:14-15), righteousness (24:16), peace (26:3), divine blessing, and protection. Other dimensions lie beyond our experience: the end of death (25:7-8); the resurrection (26:19); the cessation of enmity, corruption, and evil (60:18; 65:25); the full enjoyment of God’s presence (60:19); and God’s uncontested rule in his eternal kingdom (see Rev 21–22). These are things that those who trust in God look forward to in the coming age.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1; 24:14-16; 25:7-8; 26:19; 30:26; 43:18-19; 60:18-19; 62:2; 65:17-25; Jer 23:7-8; 31:10-14; 2 Cor 3:6-11; 5:17; Heb 12:18-24; Rev 21:1–22:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Order Isaiah differentiates the old order, the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order, a new creation where justice and harmony triumph. The old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride. Isaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the...","summary_en":"The New Order Isaiah differentiates the old order, the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order, a new creation where justice and harmony triumph. The old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride. Isaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117984,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Shepherd","title_en":"The Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\nIn the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\nThe word shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\nThe leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\nIn the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\nThe word shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\nThe leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","summary_en":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119348,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Order","title_en":"The New Order","content_ro":"<h3>The New Order<\/h3>\nIsaiah differentiates the old order,<\/em> the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order,<\/em> a new creation where justice and harmony triumph.<\/p>\nThe old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride.<\/p>\nIsaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the new order in this life, such as God’s comfort (40:1), salvation (45:22), joy (24:14-15), righteousness (24:16), peace (26:3), divine blessing, and protection. Other dimensions lie beyond our experience: the end of death (25:7-8); the resurrection (26:19); the cessation of enmity, corruption, and evil (60:18; 65:25); the full enjoyment of God’s presence (60:19); and God’s uncontested rule in his eternal kingdom (see Rev 21–22). These are things that those who trust in God look forward to in the coming age.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1; 24:14-16; 25:7-8; 26:19; 30:26; 43:18-19; 60:18-19; 62:2; 65:17-25; Jer 23:7-8; 31:10-14; 2 Cor 3:6-11; 5:17; Heb 12:18-24; Rev 21:1–22:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Order<\/h3>\nIsaiah differentiates the old order,<\/em> the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order,<\/em> a new creation where justice and harmony triumph.<\/p>\nThe old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride.<\/p>\nIsaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the new order in this life, such as God’s comfort (40:1), salvation (45:22), joy (24:14-15), righteousness (24:16), peace (26:3), divine blessing, and protection. Other dimensions lie beyond our experience: the end of death (25:7-8); the resurrection (26:19); the cessation of enmity, corruption, and evil (60:18; 65:25); the full enjoyment of God’s presence (60:19); and God’s uncontested rule in his eternal kingdom (see Rev 21–22). These are things that those who trust in God look forward to in the coming age.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1; 24:14-16; 25:7-8; 26:19; 30:26; 43:18-19; 60:18-19; 62:2; 65:17-25; Jer 23:7-8; 31:10-14; 2 Cor 3:6-11; 5:17; Heb 12:18-24; Rev 21:1–22:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Order Isaiah differentiates the old order, the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order, a new creation where justice and harmony triumph. The old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride. Isaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the...","summary_en":"The New Order Isaiah differentiates the old order, the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order, a new creation where justice and harmony triumph. The old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride. Isaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":145610,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Shepherd","title_en":"The Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\nIn the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\nThe word shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\nThe leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\nIn the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\nThe word shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\nThe leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","summary_en":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146974,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Order","title_en":"The New Order","content_ro":"<h3>The New Order<\/h3>\nIsaiah differentiates the old order,<\/em> the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order,<\/em> a new creation where justice and harmony triumph.<\/p>\nThe old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride.<\/p>\nIsaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the new order in this life, such as God’s comfort (40:1), salvation (45:22), joy (24:14-15), righteousness (24:16), peace (26:3), divine blessing, and protection. Other dimensions lie beyond our experience: the end of death (25:7-8); the resurrection (26:19); the cessation of enmity, corruption, and evil (60:18; 65:25); the full enjoyment of God’s presence (60:19); and God’s uncontested rule in his eternal kingdom (see Rev 21–22). These are things that those who trust in God look forward to in the coming age.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1; 24:14-16; 25:7-8; 26:19; 30:26; 43:18-19; 60:18-19; 62:2; 65:17-25; Jer 23:7-8; 31:10-14; 2 Cor 3:6-11; 5:17; Heb 12:18-24; Rev 21:1–22:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Order<\/h3>\nIsaiah differentiates the old order,<\/em> the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order,<\/em> a new creation where justice and harmony triumph.<\/p>\nThe old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride.<\/p>\nIsaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the new order in this life, such as God’s comfort (40:1), salvation (45:22), joy (24:14-15), righteousness (24:16), peace (26:3), divine blessing, and protection. Other dimensions lie beyond our experience: the end of death (25:7-8); the resurrection (26:19); the cessation of enmity, corruption, and evil (60:18; 65:25); the full enjoyment of God’s presence (60:19); and God’s uncontested rule in his eternal kingdom (see Rev 21–22). These are things that those who trust in God look forward to in the coming age.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1; 24:14-16; 25:7-8; 26:19; 30:26; 43:18-19; 60:18-19; 62:2; 65:17-25; Jer 23:7-8; 31:10-14; 2 Cor 3:6-11; 5:17; Heb 12:18-24; Rev 21:1–22:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Order Isaiah differentiates the old order, the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order, a new creation where justice and harmony triumph. The old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride. Isaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the...","summary_en":"The New Order Isaiah differentiates the old order, the present world of human powers and pressures, from the new order, a new creation where justice and harmony triumph. The old order evokes memories of weeping (65:19), death (65:20), oppression and violence (65:21-22), and the absence of God (65:24). It is characterized by human power and pride. Isaiah’s vision of the new order centers on the Lord as the Great King in his holiness and glory (see 6:1-5). God’s people experience aspects of the...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":32451,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ransom","title_en":"Ransom","content_ro":"<h3>RANSOM<\/h3>\nPrice for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin.<\/p>\n\nIn the Old Testament<\/p>\nIn the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by payment of ransom (cf. Lv 25–27). Ransom involved a price paid as a substitute for that which was redeemed or set free.<\/p>\nThe OT uses three different Hebrew words for ransom or redemption. Only when there is a clear indication of the payment of a price are these terms translated by “ransom.” But even when another term, such as “redemption,” is used in English translation, a ransom price is usually implied.<\/p>\nOne of the Hebrew terms (kopher<\/span>) means a “cover” or a “covering.” It was a replacement payment made in exchange for punishment. A ransom could be paid to redeem the life of the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death (Ex 21:30). A half-shekel ransom price was required by God for each Israelite at census taking to prevent a plague (30:12), and this “atonement money” was an offering to the Lord for use in the tabernacle service. A murderer could not be ransomed, and anyone who found safety in a city of refuge could not be taken back by ransom (Nm 35:31-32). It was impossible to avoid death by paying a ransom (Ps 49:7-9). But in a few instances the term takes on the meaning of a “bribe” or “hush money” (1 Sm 12:3; Prv 6:35; Am 5:12).<\/p>\nA second Hebrew word-family for “ransom” and “redemption” is related to go’el<\/span>.<\/em> Go’el<\/span>,<\/em> meaning a “reclaimant” or “redeemer,” derives from the root meaning of the Hebrew term “to restore, repair, deliver, rescue.” The term refers to God’s family-law regulations that place various obligations on a relative or kinsman (Lv 25:25-55). The kinsman had the right and duty of redeeming by ransom any family property that a person was compelled to sell (Lv 25:25-34; Ru 4:4-6); of ransoming a relative who was compelled by poverty to sell himself as a slave to a stranger or sojourner (Lv 25:47-55); and of acting as avenger of the blood of a dead relative, thus enforcing the claim for satisfaction for shedding his blood (Nm 35:19-27; Jos 20:3-5). The kinsman was also obligated to marry the wife of a dead brother who had died without leaving children so that the kinsman might raise up seed and the brother’s name not be forgotten in Israel (Ru 3:9-13; 4:1-12). In a general sense the go’el<\/span> was a “vindicator” or “redeemer”; a familiar example is Job’s cry for God to vindicate him (Jb 19:25). In the highest sense, God is the kinsman and go’el<\/span> of Israel, redeeming them from the bondage of Egypt (Ex 6:5-7), from captivity in Babylon, and from distress in general (go’el<\/span> occurs 13 times in Is 40–46). Thus Israel is called “the ransomed of the Lord” (Is 35:10), having been “redeemed without money” (52:3). In such contexts, however, the cost is indicated in terms of God’s might and power.<\/p>\nThe OT uses a third Hebrew word (pidyon<\/span>) from the area of commercial law for ransom or payment. Since God spared the firstborn in Israel at the time of Passover, the first offspring of every womb belonged to God, and the oldest male was redeemed by ransom (Ex 13:12-15; 34:20; Lv 27:27; Nm 18:15-17). Later the entire tribe of Levi was set aside as priestly substitutes for the firstborn. Since there were 273 more firstborn than Levites, a payment of five shekels was paid in ransom for each (Nm 3:40-46). This term was also used for the price paid to ransom a slave from slavery (Dt 15:15; 24:18); a slave concubine could also be ransomed (Ex 21:8-11; Lv 19:20). God motivates these provisions by his own ransoming of Israel as slaves in Egypt (Dt 15:15; 24:18). This Hebrew term is also applied to God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt (Dt 7:8; 9:26; 13:5; 2 Sm 7:23; 1 Chr 17:21; Ps 78:42) and from Babylonian captivity (Is 35:10; 51:11). Sometimes God ransoms without reference to a specific occasion (Hos 7:13; cf. Dt 21:8; Neh 1:10; Is 1:27; Jer 31:11). God also ransoms from the grave (Hos 13:14), from iniquities (Ps 130:8), and from troubles (25:22). This deliverance always implies some sort of payment or cost, such as “the mighty power” or “strong hand” of God needed for the redemption.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament<\/p>\nIn the NT there is just one family of words used for ransom. The term basically means “to loose” or “to set free.” It denotes releasing, redeeming, or liberating on payment of the ransom price. The translation “ransom” is restricted to approximately eight instances where there is a clear reference to the payment of some sort of price. The translators of the Septuagint restricted their use of this Greek word to those instances where the three Hebrew terms clearly meant ransom payment.<\/p>\nThe most important occurrence in the NT is Jesus’ description of his death “as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Three features stand out in Jesus’ words: his service is one of ransom; his self-sacrifice is the ransom price; and his ransom is substitutionary in character. “He gave his life to purchase freedom for everyone” (1 Tm 2:6). Jesus Christ “gave his life to free us from every kind of sin” (Ti 2:14). The ransom price was “the precious blood of Christ,” who was an unblemished lamb (1 Pt 1:18-19), thus linking Christ’s self-sacrifice to the sacrifices of the OT that pointed to him. The blood of goats and calves was not able to save, but an eternal redemption was obtained by Christ’s blood (Heb 9:12). In heaven the redeemed sing the new song to the Lamb whose blood ransomed them (Rv 5:9; cf. 14:3-4).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Redeemer, Redemption.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RANSOM<\/h3>\nPrice for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin.<\/p>\n\nIn the Old Testament<\/p>\nIn the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by payment of ransom (cf. Lv 25–27). Ransom involved a price paid as a substitute for that which was redeemed or set free.<\/p>\nThe OT uses three different Hebrew words for ransom or redemption. Only when there is a clear indication of the payment of a price are these terms translated by “ransom.” But even when another term, such as “redemption,” is used in English translation, a ransom price is usually implied.<\/p>\nOne of the Hebrew terms (kopher<\/span>) means a “cover” or a “covering.” It was a replacement payment made in exchange for punishment. A ransom could be paid to redeem the life of the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death (Ex 21:30). A half-shekel ransom price was required by God for each Israelite at census taking to prevent a plague (30:12), and this “atonement money” was an offering to the Lord for use in the tabernacle service. A murderer could not be ransomed, and anyone who found safety in a city of refuge could not be taken back by ransom (Nm 35:31-32). It was impossible to avoid death by paying a ransom (Ps 49:7-9). But in a few instances the term takes on the meaning of a “bribe” or “hush money” (1 Sm 12:3; Prv 6:35; Am 5:12).<\/p>\nA second Hebrew word-family for “ransom” and “redemption” is related to go’el<\/span>.<\/em> Go’el<\/span>,<\/em> meaning a “reclaimant” or “redeemer,” derives from the root meaning of the Hebrew term “to restore, repair, deliver, rescue.” The term refers to God’s family-law regulations that place various obligations on a relative or kinsman (Lv 25:25-55). The kinsman had the right and duty of redeeming by ransom any family property that a person was compelled to sell (Lv 25:25-34; Ru 4:4-6); of ransoming a relative who was compelled by poverty to sell himself as a slave to a stranger or sojourner (Lv 25:47-55); and of acting as avenger of the blood of a dead relative, thus enforcing the claim for satisfaction for shedding his blood (Nm 35:19-27; Jos 20:3-5). The kinsman was also obligated to marry the wife of a dead brother who had died without leaving children so that the kinsman might raise up seed and the brother’s name not be forgotten in Israel (Ru 3:9-13; 4:1-12). In a general sense the go’el<\/span> was a “vindicator” or “redeemer”; a familiar example is Job’s cry for God to vindicate him (Jb 19:25). In the highest sense, God is the kinsman and go’el<\/span> of Israel, redeeming them from the bondage of Egypt (Ex 6:5-7), from captivity in Babylon, and from distress in general (go’el<\/span> occurs 13 times in Is 40–46). Thus Israel is called “the ransomed of the Lord” (Is 35:10), having been “redeemed without money” (52:3). In such contexts, however, the cost is indicated in terms of God’s might and power.<\/p>\nThe OT uses a third Hebrew word (pidyon<\/span>) from the area of commercial law for ransom or payment. Since God spared the firstborn in Israel at the time of Passover, the first offspring of every womb belonged to God, and the oldest male was redeemed by ransom (Ex 13:12-15; 34:20; Lv 27:27; Nm 18:15-17). Later the entire tribe of Levi was set aside as priestly substitutes for the firstborn. Since there were 273 more firstborn than Levites, a payment of five shekels was paid in ransom for each (Nm 3:40-46). This term was also used for the price paid to ransom a slave from slavery (Dt 15:15; 24:18); a slave concubine could also be ransomed (Ex 21:8-11; Lv 19:20). God motivates these provisions by his own ransoming of Israel as slaves in Egypt (Dt 15:15; 24:18). This Hebrew term is also applied to God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt (Dt 7:8; 9:26; 13:5; 2 Sm 7:23; 1 Chr 17:21; Ps 78:42) and from Babylonian captivity (Is 35:10; 51:11). Sometimes God ransoms without reference to a specific occasion (Hos 7:13; cf. Dt 21:8; Neh 1:10; Is 1:27; Jer 31:11). God also ransoms from the grave (Hos 13:14), from iniquities (Ps 130:8), and from troubles (25:22). This deliverance always implies some sort of payment or cost, such as “the mighty power” or “strong hand” of God needed for the redemption.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament<\/p>\nIn the NT there is just one family of words used for ransom. The term basically means “to loose” or “to set free.” It denotes releasing, redeeming, or liberating on payment of the ransom price. The translation “ransom” is restricted to approximately eight instances where there is a clear reference to the payment of some sort of price. The translators of the Septuagint restricted their use of this Greek word to those instances where the three Hebrew terms clearly meant ransom payment.<\/p>\nThe most important occurrence in the NT is Jesus’ description of his death “as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Three features stand out in Jesus’ words: his service is one of ransom; his self-sacrifice is the ransom price; and his ransom is substitutionary in character. “He gave his life to purchase freedom for everyone” (1 Tm 2:6). Jesus Christ “gave his life to free us from every kind of sin” (Ti 2:14). The ransom price was “the precious blood of Christ,” who was an unblemished lamb (1 Pt 1:18-19), thus linking Christ’s self-sacrifice to the sacrifices of the OT that pointed to him. The blood of goats and calves was not able to save, but an eternal redemption was obtained by Christ’s blood (Heb 9:12). In heaven the redeemed sing the new song to the Lamb whose blood ransomed them (Rv 5:9; cf. 14:3-4).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Redeemer, Redemption.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RANSOM Price for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin. In the Old Testament In the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by p...","summary_en":"RANSOM Price for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin. In the Old Testament In the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by p...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32555,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Redemption Redeemer","title_en":"Redemption Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>REDEEMER, REDEMPTION<\/h3>\nEnglish words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison.<\/p>\nOld Testament and New Testament Words<\/p>\nFor a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the particular situation, that convey the idea of redemption. The meaning of these redemptive terms rests on legal, social, and religious customs that are foreign to modern culture. An understanding of the culture is needed for an understanding of the terminology and its use.<\/p>\nThe first term used for redemption has a legal context. The verb padah<\/span> is used when an animal substitutes for (or redeems) a person or another animal. The noun derived from the root means the ransom or the the price paid. When a living being, person or animal, requires redemption, the substitution must be made, or price paid; otherwise, the creature involved is killed (Ex 13:13; 34:20). However, there is evidence that this rule was not always strictly followed (Ex 21:8; Jb 6:23).<\/p>\nThe concept of redemption had special significance for the firstborn. The firstborn male, both man and beast, belonged to God. In theory the firstborn was sacrificed to him. This was done in the case of many animals, but the human firstborn and some animals were redeemed (Ex 13:13; 34:20; Nm 18:15-16). In the redemption of the firstborn son, an animal was substituted, although later a sum of money was paid (Nm 18:16).<\/p>\nThe second term involved is the Hebrew root ga’al<\/span>,<\/em> which is used primarily in relation to family rules and obligations, the laws governing family property rights and duties. For example, should a piece of property be lost by a family member, the next of kin had both the right and the obligation to redeem this property. This right of redemption protected the family inheritance. The noun derived from this root is equivalent to the English root “redemption,” and the person who buys back the property is the go’el<\/span> or redeemer.<\/p>\nAn Israelite who was forced to sell himself into slavery to pay his debts could be redeemed by a near relative or even by himself (Lv 25:47-49). Land might also be redeemed in the same fashion (25:25-28; Jer 32:6-9).<\/p>\nThe right of redemption extended also to persons in special circumstances. The obligation of a man to marry his brother’s widow is well known. In the book of Ruth, the right of redemption is extended to a distant relative. In this story, Boaz redeemed not only the property but Ruth as well, and she became his wife (Ru 3:13; 4:1-6).<\/p>\nThe third term used in Hebrew is the root verb kaphar<\/span>,<\/em> which means “to cover.” From this root come the terms meaning to cover sin, atone, or expiate. The noun derived, kopher<\/span>,<\/em> means the price paid to cover sin, when the term is used in the religious sense.<\/p>\nThe term is used to mean the payment made for any life that should be forfeited. A good illustration is the price paid by the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death. Under the law, the owner’s life was forfeited, but he could redeem himself by paying the required ransom (Ex 21:28-32).<\/p>\nAll three terms are translated by the same Greek verb, luo<\/span>,<\/em> meaning “to loose.” The noun lutron<\/span> (ransom), is used for all three terms on occasion. This indicates that while the Hebrew used different words for different situations, the same essential meaning of redemption was involved in all situations. The concept of redeeming or freeing was of primary concern.<\/p>\nGod as Redeemer<\/p>\nIn the OT the object of God’s redemption is generally the people as a whole, or the nation, rather than individuals. The beginning of this concept of national redemption is seen in God’s freeing the people from slavery in Egypt. Though they were in bondage, their God ransomed them (Ex 6:6; Dt 15:15).<\/p>\nAs indicated by the terms used for redeeming or ransoming, the payment of a set price or the substitution of another life was involved. When the redemptive concept is applied to God as the subject, he delivers—without the payment of a price—by his might or power: “I am the Lord<\/span>, and I will free you from your slavery in Egypt. I will redeem you with mighty power and great acts of judgment” (Ex 6:6, nlt<\/span>; cf. Dt 15:15). The same thought is carried forward in other times of need and deliverance, such as the time of exile. God is the national deliverer (e.g., Is 29:22; 35:10; 43:1; 44:22; Jer 31:11).<\/p>\nAgain there is no suggestion that God paid a price to free his people. God redeems by his own power. “For this is what the Lord<\/span> says: ‘When I sold you into exile, I received no payment. Now I can redeem you without paying for you’ ” (Is 52:3, nlt<\/span>). When Cyrus let the people free, it was again without payment of a price (45:13).<\/p>\nIn the Christian community, especially in the early centuries of the church, there arose the idea that a ransom price was needed to pay for sins. In fact, it was often taught that the sinner was, in effect, held captive by Satan. Christ’s death was the ransom price paid by God to Satan to free sinful people. This teaching is not supported by Scripture. The death of Christ is an atonement or expiation made for sin, but this does not mean that his death was a price paid to Satan. God is not pictured anywhere in Scripture as getting into such a commercial transaction with Satan. The redeeming work of the cross must always lie within the realm of divine mystery.<\/p>\n\nRedemption and the Messiah<\/p>\nIn the OT redemption is closely linked with the messianic hope. From the time of the exodus on, God is revealed as deliverer. The hope of redemption is very strong during the Captivity. The prophets constantly speak of God as redeemer or deliverer. This hope was to be fulfilled ultimately through God’s anointed one, or Messiah, who would be of the line of David (Is 9:1-6; 11:1-9; Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\nThe messianic hope grew stronger during the periods of exile and persecution. In fact, during the long centuries of persecution, this hope of a messianic deliverer was stronger than ever. This period, generally called the intertestamental period, lasted about four centuries and extended from the last of the prophets until the time of John the Baptist and Jesus.<\/p>\nChristians believe that in Jesus the Christ (or Jesus the Messiah) we see the fulfillment of the OT redemptive concept. The redemptive image is very evident in the Gospels. John the Baptist depicted Jesus of Nazareth as the fulfillment of God’s redemptive kingdom (Mt 3:12) and hence, the Messiah of Israel. Jesus, the Son of Man, came to give himself as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). The work of the Messiah was vicarious and substitutionary.<\/p>\nThe same thought occurs especially in the writings of Paul. Christ is the sin offering to the Father (Rom 3:25). Redemption is by the giving of his life (Acts 20:28) for a purchased people (1 Pt 2:9; see also 1 Cor 7:22-24; 2 Cor 5:14-17). These are all words or expressions used to present the central idea of redemption or atonement. Jesus Christ is the one who in himself fulfilled the redemption concept of Scripture and by his sacrifice provided for the redemption of sinners.<\/p>\nThe concept of redemption has deep meaning for God’s people. In the OT it illustrates the truth that God is the Savior of his covenant people. Although Israel fell into sin by denying God’s law, God did not destroy them but restored them to favor upon repentance.<\/p>\nIn the prophets, especially, God’s redemptive work was to be completed through the Messiah and his redemptive sacrifice. The followers of Jesus believed that he was the Messiah who would provide redemption for the whole world. Coupled with the idea of redemption is the motivating force of divine love as the basis for restoration (Jn 3:16). The one who believes will be freed from the bondage of sin and find favor again with his redeeming God.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Ransom; Salvation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>REDEEMER, REDEMPTION<\/h3>\nEnglish words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison.<\/p>\nOld Testament and New Testament Words<\/p>\nFor a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the particular situation, that convey the idea of redemption. The meaning of these redemptive terms rests on legal, social, and religious customs that are foreign to modern culture. An understanding of the culture is needed for an understanding of the terminology and its use.<\/p>\nThe first term used for redemption has a legal context. The verb padah<\/span> is used when an animal substitutes for (or redeems) a person or another animal. The noun derived from the root means the ransom or the the price paid. When a living being, person or animal, requires redemption, the substitution must be made, or price paid; otherwise, the creature involved is killed (Ex 13:13; 34:20). However, there is evidence that this rule was not always strictly followed (Ex 21:8; Jb 6:23).<\/p>\nThe concept of redemption had special significance for the firstborn. The firstborn male, both man and beast, belonged to God. In theory the firstborn was sacrificed to him. This was done in the case of many animals, but the human firstborn and some animals were redeemed (Ex 13:13; 34:20; Nm 18:15-16). In the redemption of the firstborn son, an animal was substituted, although later a sum of money was paid (Nm 18:16).<\/p>\nThe second term involved is the Hebrew root ga’al<\/span>,<\/em> which is used primarily in relation to family rules and obligations, the laws governing family property rights and duties. For example, should a piece of property be lost by a family member, the next of kin had both the right and the obligation to redeem this property. This right of redemption protected the family inheritance. The noun derived from this root is equivalent to the English root “redemption,” and the person who buys back the property is the go’el<\/span> or redeemer.<\/p>\nAn Israelite who was forced to sell himself into slavery to pay his debts could be redeemed by a near relative or even by himself (Lv 25:47-49). Land might also be redeemed in the same fashion (25:25-28; Jer 32:6-9).<\/p>\nThe right of redemption extended also to persons in special circumstances. The obligation of a man to marry his brother’s widow is well known. In the book of Ruth, the right of redemption is extended to a distant relative. In this story, Boaz redeemed not only the property but Ruth as well, and she became his wife (Ru 3:13; 4:1-6).<\/p>\nThe third term used in Hebrew is the root verb kaphar<\/span>,<\/em> which means “to cover.” From this root come the terms meaning to cover sin, atone, or expiate. The noun derived, kopher<\/span>,<\/em> means the price paid to cover sin, when the term is used in the religious sense.<\/p>\nThe term is used to mean the payment made for any life that should be forfeited. A good illustration is the price paid by the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death. Under the law, the owner’s life was forfeited, but he could redeem himself by paying the required ransom (Ex 21:28-32).<\/p>\nAll three terms are translated by the same Greek verb, luo<\/span>,<\/em> meaning “to loose.” The noun lutron<\/span> (ransom), is used for all three terms on occasion. This indicates that while the Hebrew used different words for different situations, the same essential meaning of redemption was involved in all situations. The concept of redeeming or freeing was of primary concern.<\/p>\nGod as Redeemer<\/p>\nIn the OT the object of God’s redemption is generally the people as a whole, or the nation, rather than individuals. The beginning of this concept of national redemption is seen in God’s freeing the people from slavery in Egypt. Though they were in bondage, their God ransomed them (Ex 6:6; Dt 15:15).<\/p>\nAs indicated by the terms used for redeeming or ransoming, the payment of a set price or the substitution of another life was involved. When the redemptive concept is applied to God as the subject, he delivers—without the payment of a price—by his might or power: “I am the Lord<\/span>, and I will free you from your slavery in Egypt. I will redeem you with mighty power and great acts of judgment” (Ex 6:6, nlt<\/span>; cf. Dt 15:15). The same thought is carried forward in other times of need and deliverance, such as the time of exile. God is the national deliverer (e.g., Is 29:22; 35:10; 43:1; 44:22; Jer 31:11).<\/p>\nAgain there is no suggestion that God paid a price to free his people. God redeems by his own power. “For this is what the Lord<\/span> says: ‘When I sold you into exile, I received no payment. Now I can redeem you without paying for you’ ” (Is 52:3, nlt<\/span>). When Cyrus let the people free, it was again without payment of a price (45:13).<\/p>\nIn the Christian community, especially in the early centuries of the church, there arose the idea that a ransom price was needed to pay for sins. In fact, it was often taught that the sinner was, in effect, held captive by Satan. Christ’s death was the ransom price paid by God to Satan to free sinful people. This teaching is not supported by Scripture. The death of Christ is an atonement or expiation made for sin, but this does not mean that his death was a price paid to Satan. God is not pictured anywhere in Scripture as getting into such a commercial transaction with Satan. The redeeming work of the cross must always lie within the realm of divine mystery.<\/p>\n\nRedemption and the Messiah<\/p>\nIn the OT redemption is closely linked with the messianic hope. From the time of the exodus on, God is revealed as deliverer. The hope of redemption is very strong during the Captivity. The prophets constantly speak of God as redeemer or deliverer. This hope was to be fulfilled ultimately through God’s anointed one, or Messiah, who would be of the line of David (Is 9:1-6; 11:1-9; Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\nThe messianic hope grew stronger during the periods of exile and persecution. In fact, during the long centuries of persecution, this hope of a messianic deliverer was stronger than ever. This period, generally called the intertestamental period, lasted about four centuries and extended from the last of the prophets until the time of John the Baptist and Jesus.<\/p>\nChristians believe that in Jesus the Christ (or Jesus the Messiah) we see the fulfillment of the OT redemptive concept. The redemptive image is very evident in the Gospels. John the Baptist depicted Jesus of Nazareth as the fulfillment of God’s redemptive kingdom (Mt 3:12) and hence, the Messiah of Israel. Jesus, the Son of Man, came to give himself as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). The work of the Messiah was vicarious and substitutionary.<\/p>\nThe same thought occurs especially in the writings of Paul. Christ is the sin offering to the Father (Rom 3:25). Redemption is by the giving of his life (Acts 20:28) for a purchased people (1 Pt 2:9; see also 1 Cor 7:22-24; 2 Cor 5:14-17). These are all words or expressions used to present the central idea of redemption or atonement. Jesus Christ is the one who in himself fulfilled the redemption concept of Scripture and by his sacrifice provided for the redemption of sinners.<\/p>\nThe concept of redemption has deep meaning for God’s people. In the OT it illustrates the truth that God is the Savior of his covenant people. Although Israel fell into sin by denying God’s law, God did not destroy them but restored them to favor upon repentance.<\/p>\nIn the prophets, especially, God’s redemptive work was to be completed through the Messiah and his redemptive sacrifice. The followers of Jesus believed that he was the Messiah who would provide redemption for the whole world. Coupled with the idea of redemption is the motivating force of divine love as the basis for restoration (Jn 3:16). The one who believes will be freed from the bondage of sin and find favor again with his redeeming God.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Ransom; Salvation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"REDEEMER, REDEMPTION English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison. Old Testament and New Testament Words For a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the parti...","summary_en":"REDEEMER, REDEMPTION English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison. Old Testament and New Testament Words For a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the parti...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52515,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:11","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:11","content_ro":"31:11<\/strong> The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.<\/p>","content_en":"31:11<\/strong> The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:11 The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.","summary_en":"31:11 The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80141,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:11","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:11","content_ro":"31:11<\/strong> The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.<\/p>","content_en":"31:11<\/strong> The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:11 The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.","summary_en":"31:11 The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107767,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:11","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:11","content_ro":"31:11<\/strong> The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.<\/p>","content_en":"31:11<\/strong> The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:11 The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.","summary_en":"31:11 The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135393,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:11","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:11","content_ro":"31:11<\/strong> The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.<\/p>","content_en":"31:11<\/strong> The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:11 The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.","summary_en":"31:11 The Lord alone could accomplish the people’s release from exile.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61088,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Family Redeemer","title_en":"The Family Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\nThe idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\nAccording to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\nThe concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nLev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\nThe idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\nAccording to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\nThe concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nLev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","summary_en":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88714,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Family Redeemer","title_en":"The Family Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\nThe idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\nAccording to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\nThe concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nLev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\nThe idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\nAccording to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\nThe concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nLev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","summary_en":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116340,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Family Redeemer","title_en":"The Family Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\nThe idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\nAccording to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\nThe concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nLev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\nThe idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\nAccording to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\nThe concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nLev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","summary_en":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143966,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Family Redeemer","title_en":"The Family Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\nThe idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\nAccording to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\nThe concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nLev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\nThe idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\nAccording to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\nThe concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nLev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","summary_en":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":52516,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:12","content_ro":"31:12<\/strong> The restored community would enjoy the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s good gifts<\/em>. The people could expect abundant crops<\/em> to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows<\/em> of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:12<\/strong> The restored community would enjoy the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s good gifts<\/em>. The people could expect abundant crops<\/em> to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows<\/em> of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:12 The restored community would enjoy the Lord’s good gifts. The people could expect abundant crops to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden.","summary_en":"31:12 The restored community would enjoy the Lord’s good gifts. The people could expect abundant crops to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80142,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:12","content_ro":"31:12<\/strong> The restored community would enjoy the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s good gifts<\/em>. The people could expect abundant crops<\/em> to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows<\/em> of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:12<\/strong> The restored community would enjoy the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s good gifts<\/em>. The people could expect abundant crops<\/em> to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows<\/em> of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:12 The restored community would enjoy the Lord’s good gifts. The people could expect abundant crops to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden.","summary_en":"31:12 The restored community would enjoy the Lord’s good gifts. The people could expect abundant crops to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107768,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:12","content_ro":"31:12<\/strong> The restored community would enjoy the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s good gifts<\/em>. The people could expect abundant crops<\/em> to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows<\/em> of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:12<\/strong> The restored community would enjoy the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s good gifts<\/em>. The people could expect abundant crops<\/em> to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows<\/em> of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:12 The restored community would enjoy the Lord’s good gifts. The people could expect abundant crops to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden.","summary_en":"31:12 The restored community would enjoy the Lord’s good gifts. The people could expect abundant crops to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135394,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:12","content_ro":"31:12<\/strong> The restored community would enjoy the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s good gifts<\/em>. The people could expect abundant crops<\/em> to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows<\/em> of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:12<\/strong> The restored community would enjoy the<\/em> Lord<\/span>’s good gifts<\/em>. The people could expect abundant crops<\/em> to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows<\/em> of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:12 The restored community would enjoy the Lord’s good gifts. The people could expect abundant crops to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden.","summary_en":"31:12 The restored community would enjoy the Lord’s good gifts. The people could expect abundant crops to spring forth in the fields with no appeal to Baal. The sorrows of their exile would be cast off, and the returnees could expect to be fruitful, like a watered garden.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":52517,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:13","content_ro":"31:13<\/strong> The Lord would replace mourning<\/em>,<\/em> a daily experience in exile, with his comfort<\/em> and a continual outpouring of rejoicing<\/em> (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).<\/p>","content_en":"31:13<\/strong> The Lord would replace mourning<\/em>,<\/em> a daily experience in exile, with his comfort<\/em> and a continual outpouring of rejoicing<\/em> (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:13 The Lord would replace mourning, a daily experience in exile, with his comfort and a continual outpouring of rejoicing (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).","summary_en":"31:13 The Lord would replace mourning, a daily experience in exile, with his comfort and a continual outpouring of rejoicing (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80143,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:13","content_ro":"31:13<\/strong> The Lord would replace mourning<\/em>,<\/em> a daily experience in exile, with his comfort<\/em> and a continual outpouring of rejoicing<\/em> (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).<\/p>","content_en":"31:13<\/strong> The Lord would replace mourning<\/em>,<\/em> a daily experience in exile, with his comfort<\/em> and a continual outpouring of rejoicing<\/em> (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:13 The Lord would replace mourning, a daily experience in exile, with his comfort and a continual outpouring of rejoicing (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).","summary_en":"31:13 The Lord would replace mourning, a daily experience in exile, with his comfort and a continual outpouring of rejoicing (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107769,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:13","content_ro":"31:13<\/strong> The Lord would replace mourning<\/em>,<\/em> a daily experience in exile, with his comfort<\/em> and a continual outpouring of rejoicing<\/em> (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).<\/p>","content_en":"31:13<\/strong> The Lord would replace mourning<\/em>,<\/em> a daily experience in exile, with his comfort<\/em> and a continual outpouring of rejoicing<\/em> (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:13 The Lord would replace mourning, a daily experience in exile, with his comfort and a continual outpouring of rejoicing (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).","summary_en":"31:13 The Lord would replace mourning, a daily experience in exile, with his comfort and a continual outpouring of rejoicing (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135395,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:13","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:13","content_ro":"31:13<\/strong> The Lord would replace mourning<\/em>,<\/em> a daily experience in exile, with his comfort<\/em> and a continual outpouring of rejoicing<\/em> (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).<\/p>","content_en":"31:13<\/strong> The Lord would replace mourning<\/em>,<\/em> a daily experience in exile, with his comfort<\/em> and a continual outpouring of rejoicing<\/em> (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:13 The Lord would replace mourning, a daily experience in exile, with his comfort and a continual outpouring of rejoicing (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).","summary_en":"31:13 The Lord would replace mourning, a daily experience in exile, with his comfort and a continual outpouring of rejoicing (see Isa 40:1-3; 61:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61293,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Celebration","title_en":"Celebration","content_ro":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","summary_en":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88919,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Celebration","title_en":"Celebration","content_ro":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","summary_en":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116545,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Celebration","title_en":"Celebration","content_ro":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","summary_en":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144171,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Celebration","title_en":"Celebration","content_ro":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Celebration<\/h3>\nGod welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).<\/p>\nDavid’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar<\/span> (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz<\/span> (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad<\/span> (1 Chr 15:29, “skipping about”). All three words refer to vigorous physical expression beyond the meaning of the Hebrew term for “celebrate” used in David’s first attempt (2 Sam 6:5). Thus, in the first procession, David celebrated; in the second procession he engaged in exultant dancing and extravagant merrymaking with intensified musical expression through the addition of shouting and trumpets.<\/p>\nMusical instruments played a significant role in Temple worship. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-31, David assigned various groups to the ministry of music. Many psalms refer to playing musical instruments in praise and worship of God (see Pss 33:2-3; 57:8; 81:2; 92:1-3; 98:4-6). In Pss 149 and 150, dance and music are combined as a praise offering. Similarly, music and dancing were heard in the father’s house in the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:25), as the son’s return was truly a joyful occasion.<\/p>\nThe book of Revelation gives a picture of the eternal celebration that awaits the faithful—a celebration characterized by worship in the presence of God (Rev 4:1-11; 5:8-14; 15:1-4). This celebration is described as a wedding feast, in which the bridegroom (Christ) and the bride (his church) are joined together forever (Rev 19:9; see also Matt 22:1-14).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 5:1; 12:17; 15:20-21; 1 Sam 18:6; 2 Sam 6:1-15; 2 Chr 7:6-10; Ezra 3:10-11; Pss 30:11; 69:30; 98:4-6; 107:32; 149:1-9; 150:1-6; Isa 30:29; 54:1; Jer 30:18-19; 31:4, 13; Lam 5:14-15; Zeph 3:17; Luke 15:22-25; 1 Cor 5:8; Eph 5:18-20; Col 3:16; Rev 18:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","summary_en":"Celebration God welcomes exuberant expressions of joy and delight from those who worship and praise him (Isa 30:29; Jer 30:19; 31:13; Zeph 3:17; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). David’s two attempts to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:1-11, 12-23) were marked by celebration. Three Hebrew terms for “danced\/dancing” are found in the account of the second procession of the Ark (see also 1 Chr 15:25-29): karar (2 Sam 6:14, 16), pazaz (NLT, “leaping,” 6:16), and raqad (1 Chr 15:29, “skippin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":52518,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:14","content_ro":"31:14<\/strong> The priests<\/em> and the people<\/em> would enjoy abundance<\/em> because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).<\/p>","content_en":"31:14<\/strong> The priests<\/em> and the people<\/em> would enjoy abundance<\/em> because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:14 The priests and the people would enjoy abundance because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).","summary_en":"31:14 The priests and the people would enjoy abundance because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80144,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:14","content_ro":"31:14<\/strong> The priests<\/em> and the people<\/em> would enjoy abundance<\/em> because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).<\/p>","content_en":"31:14<\/strong> The priests<\/em> and the people<\/em> would enjoy abundance<\/em> because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:14 The priests and the people would enjoy abundance because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).","summary_en":"31:14 The priests and the people would enjoy abundance because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107770,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:14","content_ro":"31:14<\/strong> The priests<\/em> and the people<\/em> would enjoy abundance<\/em> because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).<\/p>","content_en":"31:14<\/strong> The priests<\/em> and the people<\/em> would enjoy abundance<\/em> because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:14 The priests and the people would enjoy abundance because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).","summary_en":"31:14 The priests and the people would enjoy abundance because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135396,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:14","content_ro":"31:14<\/strong> The priests<\/em> and the people<\/em> would enjoy abundance<\/em> because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).<\/p>","content_en":"31:14<\/strong> The priests<\/em> and the people<\/em> would enjoy abundance<\/em> because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:14 The priests and the people would enjoy abundance because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).","summary_en":"31:14 The priests and the people would enjoy abundance because the people would pay their tithes rather than robbing God (Mal 3:8-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":40710,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Rachel","title_en":"Rachel","content_ro":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\nRachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\nLaban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\nSomewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\nRachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\nLaban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\nSomewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","summary_en":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68336,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Rachel","title_en":"Rachel","content_ro":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\nRachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\nLaban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\nSomewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\nRachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\nLaban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\nSomewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","summary_en":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95962,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Rachel","title_en":"Rachel","content_ro":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\nRachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\nLaban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\nSomewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\nRachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\nLaban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\nSomewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","summary_en":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123588,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Rachel","title_en":"Rachel","content_ro":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\nRachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\nLaban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\nSomewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\nRachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\nLaban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\nSomewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","summary_en":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4802,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","title_en":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\nOT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\nOne of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\nThe OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\nIn addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\nQuotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\nIn addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\nDistribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\nThe books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\nMatthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\nIn addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\nThe important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\nDifficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\nOften when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\nSome of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\nThere are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\nThe wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\nAdded to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\nSome examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, he<\/em> led captivity captive; he gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, “he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\nMatthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\nRomans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\nAn awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\nThe Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\nThe methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\nThe methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\nA different method of interpretation is based on the concept of corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\nCorrespondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\nWith these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\nThere are other texts where there seems to be an actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\nThe most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\nThe Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\nOT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\nOne of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\nThe OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\nIn addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\nQuotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\nIn addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\nDistribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\nThe books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\nMatthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\nIn addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\nThe important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\nDifficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\nOften when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\nSome of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\nThere are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\nThe wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\nAdded to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\nSome examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, he<\/em> led captivity captive; he gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, “he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\nMatthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\nRomans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\nAn awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\nThe Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\nThe methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\nThe methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\nA different method of interpretation is based on the concept of corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\nCorrespondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\nWith these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\nThere are other texts where there seems to be an actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\nThe most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\nThe Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17573,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Innocents*, Slaughter","title_en":"of the Innocents*, Slaughter","content_ro":"<h3>INNOCENTS*, Slaughter of the<\/h3>\nHerod the Great’s massacre of all the boys under two years old in Bethlehem and its vicinity (Mt 2:16-18). Herod slaughtered “the holy innocents” in an effort to destroy the child about whom the Magi had told him.<\/p>\nAlthough Matthew does not specify Herod’s motive, secular historians record ample evidence of Herod’s jealousy for his throne. He feared his own family as rivals of his power to such an extent that he put his wife and several of his sons to death. His kingdom, rife with messianic hopes and speculations, did produce some claimants. Herod himself made that association with the Magi’s quest for one born “King of the Jews” (Mt 2:2). Adding to his instability, a painful form of arteriosclerosis made the king subject to fits of delirium and rage.<\/p>\nMatthew probably had several reasons for including the story in his Gospel. For one thing, its use follows Matthew’s pattern of citing OT prophecies (in this case, Jer 31:15). Also, the incident accounts for the sojourn of Jesus’ family to Egypt and their subsequent settling in Nazareth (Mt 2:13-15, 19-23).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INNOCENTS*, Slaughter of the<\/h3>\nHerod the Great’s massacre of all the boys under two years old in Bethlehem and its vicinity (Mt 2:16-18). Herod slaughtered “the holy innocents” in an effort to destroy the child about whom the Magi had told him.<\/p>\nAlthough Matthew does not specify Herod’s motive, secular historians record ample evidence of Herod’s jealousy for his throne. He feared his own family as rivals of his power to such an extent that he put his wife and several of his sons to death. His kingdom, rife with messianic hopes and speculations, did produce some claimants. Herod himself made that association with the Magi’s quest for one born “King of the Jews” (Mt 2:2). Adding to his instability, a painful form of arteriosclerosis made the king subject to fits of delirium and rage.<\/p>\nMatthew probably had several reasons for including the story in his Gospel. For one thing, its use follows Matthew’s pattern of citing OT prophecies (in this case, Jer 31:15). Also, the incident accounts for the sojourn of Jesus’ family to Egypt and their subsequent settling in Nazareth (Mt 2:13-15, 19-23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"INNOCENTS*, Slaughter of the Herod the Great’s massacre of all the boys under two years old in Bethlehem and its vicinity (Mt 2:16-18). Herod slaughtered “the holy innocents” in an effort to destroy the child about whom the Magi had told him. Although Matthew does not specify Herod’s motive, secular historians record ample evidence of Herod’s jealousy for his throne. He feared his own family as rivals of his power to such an extent that he put his wife and several of his sons to death. His ki...","summary_en":"INNOCENTS*, Slaughter of the Herod the Great’s massacre of all the boys under two years old in Bethlehem and its vicinity (Mt 2:16-18). Herod slaughtered “the holy innocents” in an effort to destroy the child about whom the Magi had told him. Although Matthew does not specify Herod’s motive, secular historians record ample evidence of Herod’s jealousy for his throne. He feared his own family as rivals of his power to such an extent that he put his wife and several of his sons to death. His ki...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32307,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Rachel","title_en":"Rachel","content_ro":"<h3>RACHEL<\/h3>\nBeautiful younger daughter of Laban; she was the favorite wife of Jacob. He first met her as he arrived at Haran in Paddan-aram. There he assisted her by attending to the needs of Rachel’s father’s sheep, removing a stone from the mouth of a well in order to water them (Gn 29:10). Jacob loved Rachel exceedingly and agreed to work seven years for Laban in return for her hand in marriage. His seven years’ service seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively reneged on his bargain and required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel for his wife. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (30:1). Consequently, she gave her servant, Bilhah, to Jacob in order to have children. Thus, through this commonly accepted ancient custom, Dan and Naphtali were born. In time, Rachel herself conceived and bore Joseph (vv 22-25). After this, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\nSomewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (Gn 35:16, 19). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb there, a landmark known even in the days of Saul (1 Sm 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded as those who built up the house of Israel (Ru 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity. Later, Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words in Herod’s slaughter of the male infants (Mt 2:18).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jacob #1.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RACHEL<\/h3>\nBeautiful younger daughter of Laban; she was the favorite wife of Jacob. He first met her as he arrived at Haran in Paddan-aram. There he assisted her by attending to the needs of Rachel’s father’s sheep, removing a stone from the mouth of a well in order to water them (Gn 29:10). Jacob loved Rachel exceedingly and agreed to work seven years for Laban in return for her hand in marriage. His seven years’ service seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively reneged on his bargain and required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel for his wife. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (30:1). Consequently, she gave her servant, Bilhah, to Jacob in order to have children. Thus, through this commonly accepted ancient custom, Dan and Naphtali were born. In time, Rachel herself conceived and bore Joseph (vv 22-25). After this, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\nSomewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (Gn 35:16, 19). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb there, a landmark known even in the days of Saul (1 Sm 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded as those who built up the house of Israel (Ru 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity. Later, Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words in Herod’s slaughter of the male infants (Mt 2:18).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jacob #1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RACHEL Beautiful younger daughter of Laban; she was the favorite wife of Jacob. He first met her as he arrived at Haran in Paddan-aram. There he assisted her by attending to the needs of Rachel’s father’s sheep, removing a stone from the mouth of a well in order to water them (Gn 29:10). Jacob loved Rachel exceedingly and agreed to work seven years for Laban in return for her hand in marriage. His seven years’ service seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban decept...","summary_en":"RACHEL Beautiful younger daughter of Laban; she was the favorite wife of Jacob. He first met her as he arrived at Haran in Paddan-aram. There he assisted her by attending to the needs of Rachel’s father’s sheep, removing a stone from the mouth of a well in order to water them (Gn 29:10). Jacob loved Rachel exceedingly and agreed to work seven years for Laban in return for her hand in marriage. His seven years’ service seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban decept...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32313,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Rachel’s Tomb","title_en":"Rachel’s Tomb","content_ro":"<h3>RACHEL’S TOMB<\/h3>\nLandmark set up by Jacob at the site of Rachel’s grave (Gn 35:19-20) that was still in existence at the time of Samuel (1 Sm 10:2). Two persisting traditions make its original location still questionable. The older tradition locates the tomb near Bethlehem, south of Jerusalem (Gn 35:19; 48:7; Mt 2:18). This option has won the impressive historical support of Josephus, Eusebius, Jerome, Origen, and the Talmudists. A second site is Ephrath (Gn 35:19), which was on the northern border of Benjamin, 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of Jerusalem (1 Sm 10:2; Jer 31:15), near ancient Bethel.<\/p>\nRachel’s tomb is the first recorded instance in the Bible of a sepulchral monument. A picture of the tomb is a common decorative piece in Jewish homes throughout the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RACHEL’S TOMB<\/h3>\nLandmark set up by Jacob at the site of Rachel’s grave (Gn 35:19-20) that was still in existence at the time of Samuel (1 Sm 10:2). Two persisting traditions make its original location still questionable. The older tradition locates the tomb near Bethlehem, south of Jerusalem (Gn 35:19; 48:7; Mt 2:18). This option has won the impressive historical support of Josephus, Eusebius, Jerome, Origen, and the Talmudists. A second site is Ephrath (Gn 35:19), which was on the northern border of Benjamin, 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of Jerusalem (1 Sm 10:2; Jer 31:15), near ancient Bethel.<\/p>\nRachel’s tomb is the first recorded instance in the Bible of a sepulchral monument. A picture of the tomb is a common decorative piece in Jewish homes throughout the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RACHEL’S TOMB Landmark set up by Jacob at the site of Rachel’s grave (Gn 35:19-20) that was still in existence at the time of Samuel (1 Sm 10:2). Two persisting traditions make its original location still questionable. The older tradition locates the tomb near Bethlehem, south of Jerusalem (Gn 35:19; 48:7; Mt 2:18). This option has won the impressive historical support of Josephus, Eusebius, Jerome, Origen, and the Talmudists. A second site is Ephrath (Gn 35:19), which was on the northern bor...","summary_en":"RACHEL’S TOMB Landmark set up by Jacob at the site of Rachel’s grave (Gn 35:19-20) that was still in existence at the time of Samuel (1 Sm 10:2). Two persisting traditions make its original location still questionable. The older tradition locates the tomb near Bethlehem, south of Jerusalem (Gn 35:19; 48:7; Mt 2:18). This option has won the impressive historical support of Josephus, Eusebius, Jerome, Origen, and the Talmudists. A second site is Ephrath (Gn 35:19), which was on the northern bor...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32330,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Rahel*","title_en":"Rahel*","content_ro":"<h3>RAHEL*<\/h3>\nKJV spelling of Rachel, Jacob’s wife, in Jeremiah 31:15. See<\/em> Rachel.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RAHEL*<\/h3>\nKJV spelling of Rachel, Jacob’s wife, in Jeremiah 31:15. See<\/em> Rachel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RAHEL* KJV spelling of Rachel, Jacob’s wife, in Jeremiah 31:15. See Rachel.","summary_en":"RAHEL* KJV spelling of Rachel, Jacob’s wife, in Jeremiah 31:15. See Rachel.","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32356,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ramah","title_en":"Ramah","content_ro":"<h3>RAMAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. One of the cities located in the territory allotted to Benjamin’s tribe for an inheritance, listed between Gibeon and Beeroth (Jos 18:25). In the proximity of this town, Rachel, Jacob’s wife, was buried (Mt 2:18; cf. Gn 35:16-21; Jer 31:15). Ramah, positioned near Bethel, was the place where Deborah judged Israel (Jgs 4:5). This city was a temporary resting place for a Levite and his concubine traveling north from Bethlehem (19:13).<\/li>\nDuring the period of the divided kingdom (930– 722 BC<\/span>), King Baasha of Israel (908–886 BC<\/span>) fortified Ramah. From Ramah, Baasha was able to prevent an invasion of King Asa’s (910–869 BC<\/span>) Judean army. Baasha later abandoned the city and hurried his army north to repulse a Syrian offensive led by King Ben-hadad I (c. 885 BC<\/span>). Asa dismantled Ramah’s military fortifications, using the material to build the towns of Geba and Mizpah (1 Kgs 15:17-22; 2 Chr 16:1-6).<\/p>\nThe cities of Geba, Ramah, and Gibeah formed the route taken by the Assyrian army during Sennacherib’s military incursion into Judah (c. 701 BC<\/span>) against King Hezekiah and Jerusalem (Is 10:29). Later King Nebuchadnezzar used Ramah as a place of detainment for the Jews being deported to Babylon. Here Nebuzaradan, the captain of the guard, released Jeremiah from among the captives (Jer 40:1).<\/p>\nFollowing the Babylonian captivity, inhabitants of Ramah returned with Zerubbabel to Palestine and rebuilt this city (Ezr 2:26; Neh 7:30). Some suggest that the postexilic town of Ramah was another Benjaminite town located farther west near the coastal plain (Neh 11:33). The site of Ramah is identified with the modern village of er-Ram, five miles (8 kilometers) north of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<li>2. City in the Negev marking the southern extremity of the territory allotted to the tribe of Simeon within Judah’s inheritance (Jos 19:8); also called Ramoth of the Negev (1 Sm 30:27) and Baalath-beer (Jos 19:8; cf. 1 Chr 4:33). See<\/em> Baalath-beer.<\/li>\n<li>3. Town defining the boundary of the territory assigned to Asher’s tribe for an inheritance, mentioned between Sidon and Tyre (Jos 19:29).<\/li>\n<li>4. One of 19 fortified cities given to Naphtali’s tribe for a possession, mentioned between Adamah and Hazor (Jos 19:36). Its location is identifiable with the modern town of er-Rameh, about 11 miles (17.7 kilometers) northwest of the Sea of Galilee.<\/li>\n<li>5. Home of Samuel’s parents, Elkanah and Hannah; the birthplace of Samuel (1 Sm 1:19; 2:11); and later his home (7:17; 16:13). Samuel judged Israel from Ramah, Bethel, Gilgal, and Mizpah (7:17). Saul first met Samuel at this city (9:6-10). Here the elders of Israel petitioned Samuel to appoint a king for them (8:4), and later this city provided David a place of refuge from King Saul (19:18–20:1). Samuel was buried at Ramah (25:1; 28:3). Ramah is alternately called Ramathaim-zophim in 1 Samuel 1:1.<\/li>\n<li>6. Abbreviated name for Ramoth-gilead (2 Kgs 8:29; 2 Chr 22:6). See<\/em> Ramoth-gilead.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>RAMAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. One of the cities located in the territory allotted to Benjamin’s tribe for an inheritance, listed between Gibeon and Beeroth (Jos 18:25). In the proximity of this town, Rachel, Jacob’s wife, was buried (Mt 2:18; cf. Gn 35:16-21; Jer 31:15). Ramah, positioned near Bethel, was the place where Deborah judged Israel (Jgs 4:5). This city was a temporary resting place for a Levite and his concubine traveling north from Bethlehem (19:13).<\/li>\nDuring the period of the divided kingdom (930– 722 BC<\/span>), King Baasha of Israel (908–886 BC<\/span>) fortified Ramah. From Ramah, Baasha was able to prevent an invasion of King Asa’s (910–869 BC<\/span>) Judean army. Baasha later abandoned the city and hurried his army north to repulse a Syrian offensive led by King Ben-hadad I (c. 885 BC<\/span>). Asa dismantled Ramah’s military fortifications, using the material to build the towns of Geba and Mizpah (1 Kgs 15:17-22; 2 Chr 16:1-6).<\/p>\nThe cities of Geba, Ramah, and Gibeah formed the route taken by the Assyrian army during Sennacherib’s military incursion into Judah (c. 701 BC<\/span>) against King Hezekiah and Jerusalem (Is 10:29). Later King Nebuchadnezzar used Ramah as a place of detainment for the Jews being deported to Babylon. Here Nebuzaradan, the captain of the guard, released Jeremiah from among the captives (Jer 40:1).<\/p>\nFollowing the Babylonian captivity, inhabitants of Ramah returned with Zerubbabel to Palestine and rebuilt this city (Ezr 2:26; Neh 7:30). Some suggest that the postexilic town of Ramah was another Benjaminite town located farther west near the coastal plain (Neh 11:33). The site of Ramah is identified with the modern village of er-Ram, five miles (8 kilometers) north of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<li>2. City in the Negev marking the southern extremity of the territory allotted to the tribe of Simeon within Judah’s inheritance (Jos 19:8); also called Ramoth of the Negev (1 Sm 30:27) and Baalath-beer (Jos 19:8; cf. 1 Chr 4:33). See<\/em> Baalath-beer.<\/li>\n<li>3. Town defining the boundary of the territory assigned to Asher’s tribe for an inheritance, mentioned between Sidon and Tyre (Jos 19:29).<\/li>\n<li>4. One of 19 fortified cities given to Naphtali’s tribe for a possession, mentioned between Adamah and Hazor (Jos 19:36). Its location is identifiable with the modern town of er-Rameh, about 11 miles (17.7 kilometers) northwest of the Sea of Galilee.<\/li>\n<li>5. Home of Samuel’s parents, Elkanah and Hannah; the birthplace of Samuel (1 Sm 1:19; 2:11); and later his home (7:17; 16:13). Samuel judged Israel from Ramah, Bethel, Gilgal, and Mizpah (7:17). Saul first met Samuel at this city (9:6-10). Here the elders of Israel petitioned Samuel to appoint a king for them (8:4), and later this city provided David a place of refuge from King Saul (19:18–20:1). Samuel was buried at Ramah (25:1; 28:3). Ramah is alternately called Ramathaim-zophim in 1 Samuel 1:1.<\/li>\n<li>6. Abbreviated name for Ramoth-gilead (2 Kgs 8:29; 2 Chr 22:6). See<\/em> Ramoth-gilead.<\/li>","summary_ro":"RAMAH 1. One of the cities located in the territory allotted to Benjamin’s tribe for an inheritance, listed between Gibeon and Beeroth (Jos 18:25). In the proximity of this town, Rachel, Jacob’s wife, was buried (Mt 2:18; cf. Gn 35:16-21; Jer 31:15). Ramah, positioned near Bethel, was the place where Deborah judged Israel (Jgs 4:5). This city was a temporary resting place for a Levite and his concubine traveling north from Bethlehem (19:13). During the period of the divided kingdom (930– 722 ...","summary_en":"RAMAH 1. One of the cities located in the territory allotted to Benjamin’s tribe for an inheritance, listed between Gibeon and Beeroth (Jos 18:25). In the proximity of this town, Rachel, Jacob’s wife, was buried (Mt 2:18; cf. Gn 35:16-21; Jer 31:15). Ramah, positioned near Bethel, was the place where Deborah judged Israel (Jgs 4:5). This city was a temporary resting place for a Levite and his concubine traveling north from Bethlehem (19:13). During the period of the divided kingdom (930– 722 ...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52519,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:15","content_ro":"31:15-40<\/strong> The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.<\/p>","content_en":"31:15-40<\/strong> The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:15-40 The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.","summary_en":"31:15-40 The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52520,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:15","content_ro":"31:15<\/strong> Rachel<\/em>,<\/em> Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.<\/p>","content_en":"31:15<\/strong> Rachel<\/em>,<\/em> Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:15 Rachel, Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.","summary_en":"31:15 Rachel, Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80145,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:15","content_ro":"31:15-40<\/strong> The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.<\/p>","content_en":"31:15-40<\/strong> The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:15-40 The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.","summary_en":"31:15-40 The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80146,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:15","content_ro":"31:15<\/strong> Rachel<\/em>,<\/em> Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.<\/p>","content_en":"31:15<\/strong> Rachel<\/em>,<\/em> Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:15 Rachel, Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.","summary_en":"31:15 Rachel, Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107771,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:15","content_ro":"31:15-40<\/strong> The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.<\/p>","content_en":"31:15-40<\/strong> The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:15-40 The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.","summary_en":"31:15-40 The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107772,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:15","content_ro":"31:15<\/strong> Rachel<\/em>,<\/em> Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.<\/p>","content_en":"31:15<\/strong> Rachel<\/em>,<\/em> Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:15 Rachel, Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.","summary_en":"31:15 Rachel, Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135397,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:15","content_ro":"31:15-40<\/strong> The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.<\/p>","content_en":"31:15-40<\/strong> The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:15-40 The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.","summary_en":"31:15-40 The Lord expanded on his future project of rebuilding a new nation out of a people who had suffered greatly during their lengthy captivity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135398,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:15","content_ro":"31:15<\/strong> Rachel<\/em>,<\/em> Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.<\/p>","content_en":"31:15<\/strong> Rachel<\/em>,<\/em> Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:15 Rachel, Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.","summary_en":"31:15 Rachel, Jacob’s favorite wife, was the mother of Joseph (father of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern kingdom) and Benjamin (whose descendants were in the southern kingdom). She represented the mothers in all Israel whose children were taken into exile. • Matthew 2:18 quotes this verse in relation to the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":52521,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:16","content_ro":"31:16-17<\/strong> Rachel should not weep<\/em>,<\/em> because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children<\/em> out of captivity and back to their own land<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:16-17<\/strong> Rachel should not weep<\/em>,<\/em> because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children<\/em> out of captivity and back to their own land<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:16-17 Rachel should not weep, because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children out of captivity and back to their own land.","summary_en":"31:16-17 Rachel should not weep, because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children out of captivity and back to their own land.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80147,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:16","content_ro":"31:16-17<\/strong> Rachel should not weep<\/em>,<\/em> because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children<\/em> out of captivity and back to their own land<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:16-17<\/strong> Rachel should not weep<\/em>,<\/em> because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children<\/em> out of captivity and back to their own land<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:16-17 Rachel should not weep, because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children out of captivity and back to their own land.","summary_en":"31:16-17 Rachel should not weep, because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children out of captivity and back to their own land.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107773,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:16","content_ro":"31:16-17<\/strong> Rachel should not weep<\/em>,<\/em> because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children<\/em> out of captivity and back to their own land<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:16-17<\/strong> Rachel should not weep<\/em>,<\/em> because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children<\/em> out of captivity and back to their own land<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:16-17 Rachel should not weep, because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children out of captivity and back to their own land.","summary_en":"31:16-17 Rachel should not weep, because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children out of captivity and back to their own land.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135399,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:16","content_ro":"31:16-17<\/strong> Rachel should not weep<\/em>,<\/em> because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children<\/em> out of captivity and back to their own land<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:16-17<\/strong> Rachel should not weep<\/em>,<\/em> because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children<\/em> out of captivity and back to their own land<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:16-17 Rachel should not weep, because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children out of captivity and back to their own land.","summary_en":"31:16-17 Rachel should not weep, because the Lord promised to bring her exiled children out of captivity and back to their own land.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":4856,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","title_en":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\nOT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\nOne of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\nThe OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\nIn addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\nQuotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\nIn addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\nDistribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\nThe books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\nMatthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\nIn addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\nThe important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\nDifficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\nOften when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\nSome of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\nThere are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\nThe wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\nAdded to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\nSome examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, he<\/em> led captivity captive; he gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, “he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\nMatthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\nRomans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\nAn awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\nThe Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\nThe methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\nThe methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\nA different method of interpretation is based on the concept of corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\nCorrespondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\nWith these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\nThere are other texts where there seems to be an actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\nThe most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\nThe Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\nOT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\nOne of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\nThe OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\nIn addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\nQuotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\nIn addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\nDistribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\nThe books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\nMatthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\nIn addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\nThe important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\nDifficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\nOften when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\nSome of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\nThere are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\nThe wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\nAdded to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\nSome examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, he<\/em> led captivity captive; he gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, “he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\nMatthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\nRomans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\nAn awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\nThe Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\nThe methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\nThe methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\nA different method of interpretation is based on the concept of corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\nCorrespondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\nWith these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\nThere are other texts where there seems to be an actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\nThe most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\nThe Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":9671,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Discipline","title_en":"Discipline","content_ro":"<h3>DISCIPLINE<\/h3>\nLearning that molds character and enforces correct behavior—from a Latin word meaning “instruction” or “training.” To discipline a person or a group means to put them in a state of good order so that they function in the way intended. Discipline, in spite of a popular misconception, is not inherently stern or harsh. Bible translators chose “disciple” as an appropriate term for one who learns by following.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Biblical Teaching<\/p>\n• Self-Discipline<\/p>\n• Parental Discipline<\/p>\n• Church Discipline<\/p>\nBiblical Teaching<\/p>\nAlthough used only once in the kjv<\/span> (Jb 36:10), the word “discipline,” in various noun and verb forms, occurs frequently in modern versions of the Bible. The Hebrew and Greek words commonly rendered “discipline” are sometimes translated as “reproof,” “warning,” “restraint,” “correction,” or (especially in kjv<\/span>) “chastisement.” More positive synonyms include “upbringing,” “training,” “instruction,” and “education.”<\/p>\nOT usage of “discipline” is noticeably more negative than in the NT, principally because of the legal aspect of God’s approach to Israel under the old (Mosaic) covenant. The “new covenant” approach to the church leads to a more positive language of discipline in the NT. Yet both covenants had the same goal: righteousness. Considered in that light, even the OT emphasis on punishment proceeds from a positive motive toward a constructive goal. Where the OT emphasized retaliation, it was to teach offenders the nature of their offense by showing them an effect like the one they had caused. Vindication of a wronged person’s rights also vindicated God’s righteousness. Vindication was an important way of upholding God’s justice. Retribution was also important. Covenant breaking brought on the covenant curse (Dt 27:26) in the form of punitive discipline. Retribution reestablished the authority of God’s law and taught respect for his standards of righteousness.<\/p>\nComplementary to punitive discipline, positive discipline can be thought of as reinforcive discipline. God always disciplines; he does so punitively when necessary, but reinforcingly when possible.<\/p>\nDiscipline is frequently spoken of as being exercised by God over Israel (Lv 26:23; Dt 4:36; 8:5; Jer 31:18), over the nations (Ps 94:10), or over individuals (Jb 5:17; Ps 94:10, 12; Heb 12:5-11; Rv 3:19). In Israel parental responsibility to discipline children was taken seriously (Dt 21:18). Fathers were solemnly charged to discipline their sons (Prv 13:24; 19:18; 22:15; 23:13; 29:17; cf. Eph 6:4; Heb 12:7-10). In the church, disciplining was a pastoral responsibility (2 Tm 2:25).<\/p>\nIt is understandable that people fear discipline from God (Ps 6:1), but it is his wrath that should be feared. His wrath is directed only against those who have proved themselves by their actions to be God’s enemies (Dt 11:2-3). God’s discipline is different from his wrath and should not be despised (Prv 3:11) or taken for granted (Heb 12:5). Only a fool or wicked person hates it (Ps 50:17; Prv 5:12; Jer 31:18). God disciplines his people as a loving father disciplines a beloved son (Dt 8:5; Prv 3:11-12; Heb 12:5-7). According to Scripture, a wise person should love discipline (Prv 12:1; 13:24; 2 Tm 1:7; Heb 12:5, 9).<\/p>\nThe fruit of discipline is knowledge (Prv 12:1) and parents’ delight (29:17). One who is disciplined can be spoken of as “blessed” (Jb 5:17; Ps 94:12). Where the purpose of discipline is left unspecified, the discipline is nevertheless understood as good and righteous (Dt 4:36; Jb 36:10; Prv 13:24; Rv 3:19). Specifically, discipline is called “the way of life” (Prv 6:23). It saves one from destruction (19:18) and allows one to escape both folly (22:15) and God’s condemnation of the world (1 Cor 11:32). It eventually leads to sharing God’s holiness (Heb 12:7), and yields “the peaceful fruit of righteousness” (v 11, rsv<\/span>). In contrast, the consequences of a lack of discipline are stipulated to be abandonment by God (Lv 26:23-24), death (Prv 5:23), and destruction (19:18).<\/p>\nThe book of Proverbs speaks of discipline as necessary to avoid sexual immorality (5:12-23; 6:23-24). Loose or wicked women probably symbolize many kinds of deceptive and enticing situations. To be able to act maturely and responsibly in such situations requires that young people respond to wise and loving parental discipline so that they learn to live disciplined lives. They will then do by “bent of nature” what is right because their nature has been shaped to what it right. Evil can then be shunned, even when it is encountered unexpectedly.<\/p>\nThe book of Hebrews also urges its readers to respond to discipline rather than to react against it. In Hebrews two harmful reactions are stipulated and the helpful response is identified. On the one hand, no individual should regard lightly the discipline of the Lord (Heb 12:5). Discipline should be regarded neither as worthless nor as being of little value. On the other hand, one should not lose courage when he is punished by the Lord. That is, preoccupation with the negative aspect of the disciplinary procedure must not obscure its goal or demoralize persons being disciplined. There is a purpose for what happens, which should be sought and realized: “No discipline is enjoyable while it happening—it is painful! But afterward there will be a quiet harvest of right living for those who are trained in this way” (Heb 12:11, nlt<\/span>). The exhortation is not to reject discipline or be dejected by it, but to accept it and be instructed by it.<\/p>\nSelf-Discipline<\/p>\nJesus’ ethics of righteousness both fulfill and surpass the stringent code of the old covenant (Mt 5:17-48). Yet Christians are not therefore inherently more legalistic than were the Pharisees. Set free from “the law of sin and death,” Christians have “the law of the Spirit of life in Jesus Christ” (Rom 8:1-8) to provide a built-in dynamic to fulfill the will of God. Beyond slavish obedience to the letter of the law, believers are enabled by the indwelling Spirit of God to exercise self-discipline. Spiritual transformation is accompanied by renewal of the mind (Rom 12:2), which brings fresh understanding of oneself, one’s motivations, and one’s attitudes.<\/p>\n\nParental Discipline<\/p>\nThe family constitutes the basic unit of the human community. Within that cell of intimate relationships, parents are entrusted with the responsibility of guiding and correcting their children (Dt 6:7; Prv 22:6). The biblical view is essentially pessimistic about the perfectibility of human nature. Therefore, parents are urged not to leave children at the mercy of their own natural tendencies. Undisciplined children are potential victims of the powerful conditioning exerted by a predominantly pagan culture. To exercise their responsibilities properly, parents must model values, practices, and attitudes to their children, besides teaching them through instruction and correction.<\/p>\nThe parents’ educational task is best accomplished through positive means such as advice, exhortation, counseling, family devotions, and Christian training in church and Sunday school. But it also may require negative measures, such as prohibitions and disciplinary action. When verbal admonitions are not heeded by small children, punishment becomes an effective form of persuasion (Prv 13:24). Physical discipline, however, should be administered on the basis of clearly stated and understood principles. Christian parents must avoid punishing out of anger or personal animosity, and must never cause injury to a child. Physical discipline should be viewed as a last resort intended to obtain maximum educational results with minimum outrage to children (Eph 6:4).<\/p>\nHuman fallenness (Gn 3) means that self-centeredness infects even children (cf. Ps 51:5). Somehow children must learn respect for themselves and for others. Left on their own and then battered by a fallen society, they can become rebellious social misfits leaving a trail of heartache in their own lives and in the lives of other people. Love for one’s children does not preclude the use of negative disciplinary measures. As distasteful as they may seem to both parents and children, genuine love may require them. A family environment regulated by consistent and loving firmness will enhance the chances for children to mature as responsible and considerate individuals.<\/p>\nChurch Discipline<\/p>\nThe church is basically a large family of which each believer is a member. The nature of the church—as a community intended to reflect in the faith, worship, and lives of its members the true character of God—distinguishes it from all other groups.<\/p>\nAt the same time, the church is called to be an open community of concern, reaching out in compassion to desperately needy human beings. Christian lifestyles clearly differ from pagan lifestyles. That difference often creates a barrier isolating the “lost” from the very people who could extend to them God’s deliverance from loneliness, addictions, disorientation, broken relationships, and so on. The church has a responsibility not to place unscriptural obstacles in the way of its outreach to unbelievers, yet the tension between openness and purity is difficult to resolve. Without a careful balance, a church can easily become unduly restrictive or overly permissive. In either extreme its witness is impaired.<\/p>\nThe solution to the dilemma lies in formulating church discipline that is authentically biblical. The Scriptures provide the church with ample guidance for the formulation of standards of conduct (e.g., Ex 20:1-17; 1 Cor 5:11; 6:9-11; Eph 4:25-32; 5:1-21; Col 3:5-11). As those standards are spelled out, however, it is necessary to differentiate between biblical absolutes and cultural norms. For instance, though drunkenness is expressly forbidden in the NT, there is no scriptural prohibition on the drinking of wine. Some churches allow drinking but decry drunkenness, others recommend abstinence to their members, and still others make abstinence from alcoholic beverages a condition of membership. The NT, recognizing that conflict sometimes occurs between Christian liberty and Christian responsibility, gives guidelines for resolving such conflicts (1 Cor 8).<\/p>\nFor the sake of scriptural consistency and in order to be credible, church discipline should oppose sins of attitude with the same severity as for “gross sins.” The NT condemns immorality, murder, and drunkenness—but along with them envy, jealousy, anger, selfishness, complaining, and criticism. Each of the vices is an impediment to entering the kingdom of God (Gal 5:19-21). Unbelievers are often made to feel unwelcome in the church because of secondary matters such as smoking or drinking. Yet gossiping, complaining, and selfishness among church members are seldom exposed and properly disciplined. A more consistent position would promote the purity of the church and would also enhance its ministry as a supportive, accepting center of Christian love.<\/p>\nIn addition to affirming the necessity for discipline within the church, the NT delineates a procedure for carrying out disciplinary action (Mt 18:15-18; 1 Cor 5:3-13; Gal 6:1). Offenders are first to be approached and admonished privately. If they refuse to repent or mend their ways, the case is to be presented before the leadership of the church and then, if necessary, before the whole congregation. Should offenders persist in their error, they are to be ostracized, not out of vindictiveness but with the hope of bringing them to repentance and restoration (2 Thes 3:14-15).<\/p>\nThe Bible’s emphasis on the necessity for self-discipline, parental discipline, and church discipline seems underscored by the moral decline evident in many areas of modern society. God’s love, as depicted in the Bible and exemplified in Jesus Christ, is intended to teach all people how to live. Those who spurn God’s “positive reinforcement” encounter the negative aspects of his discipline. Christians who discipline themselves, their children, and each other in a loving way honor Christ and model his way of life, thus helping others to understand God’s purposes.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DISCIPLINE<\/h3>\nLearning that molds character and enforces correct behavior—from a Latin word meaning “instruction” or “training.” To discipline a person or a group means to put them in a state of good order so that they function in the way intended. Discipline, in spite of a popular misconception, is not inherently stern or harsh. Bible translators chose “disciple” as an appropriate term for one who learns by following.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Biblical Teaching<\/p>\n• Self-Discipline<\/p>\n• Parental Discipline<\/p>\n• Church Discipline<\/p>\nBiblical Teaching<\/p>\nAlthough used only once in the kjv<\/span> (Jb 36:10), the word “discipline,” in various noun and verb forms, occurs frequently in modern versions of the Bible. The Hebrew and Greek words commonly rendered “discipline” are sometimes translated as “reproof,” “warning,” “restraint,” “correction,” or (especially in kjv<\/span>) “chastisement.” More positive synonyms include “upbringing,” “training,” “instruction,” and “education.”<\/p>\nOT usage of “discipline” is noticeably more negative than in the NT, principally because of the legal aspect of God’s approach to Israel under the old (Mosaic) covenant. The “new covenant” approach to the church leads to a more positive language of discipline in the NT. Yet both covenants had the same goal: righteousness. Considered in that light, even the OT emphasis on punishment proceeds from a positive motive toward a constructive goal. Where the OT emphasized retaliation, it was to teach offenders the nature of their offense by showing them an effect like the one they had caused. Vindication of a wronged person’s rights also vindicated God’s righteousness. Vindication was an important way of upholding God’s justice. Retribution was also important. Covenant breaking brought on the covenant curse (Dt 27:26) in the form of punitive discipline. Retribution reestablished the authority of God’s law and taught respect for his standards of righteousness.<\/p>\nComplementary to punitive discipline, positive discipline can be thought of as reinforcive discipline. God always disciplines; he does so punitively when necessary, but reinforcingly when possible.<\/p>\nDiscipline is frequently spoken of as being exercised by God over Israel (Lv 26:23; Dt 4:36; 8:5; Jer 31:18), over the nations (Ps 94:10), or over individuals (Jb 5:17; Ps 94:10, 12; Heb 12:5-11; Rv 3:19). In Israel parental responsibility to discipline children was taken seriously (Dt 21:18). Fathers were solemnly charged to discipline their sons (Prv 13:24; 19:18; 22:15; 23:13; 29:17; cf. Eph 6:4; Heb 12:7-10). In the church, disciplining was a pastoral responsibility (2 Tm 2:25).<\/p>\nIt is understandable that people fear discipline from God (Ps 6:1), but it is his wrath that should be feared. His wrath is directed only against those who have proved themselves by their actions to be God’s enemies (Dt 11:2-3). God’s discipline is different from his wrath and should not be despised (Prv 3:11) or taken for granted (Heb 12:5). Only a fool or wicked person hates it (Ps 50:17; Prv 5:12; Jer 31:18). God disciplines his people as a loving father disciplines a beloved son (Dt 8:5; Prv 3:11-12; Heb 12:5-7). According to Scripture, a wise person should love discipline (Prv 12:1; 13:24; 2 Tm 1:7; Heb 12:5, 9).<\/p>\nThe fruit of discipline is knowledge (Prv 12:1) and parents’ delight (29:17). One who is disciplined can be spoken of as “blessed” (Jb 5:17; Ps 94:12). Where the purpose of discipline is left unspecified, the discipline is nevertheless understood as good and righteous (Dt 4:36; Jb 36:10; Prv 13:24; Rv 3:19). Specifically, discipline is called “the way of life” (Prv 6:23). It saves one from destruction (19:18) and allows one to escape both folly (22:15) and God’s condemnation of the world (1 Cor 11:32). It eventually leads to sharing God’s holiness (Heb 12:7), and yields “the peaceful fruit of righteousness” (v 11, rsv<\/span>). In contrast, the consequences of a lack of discipline are stipulated to be abandonment by God (Lv 26:23-24), death (Prv 5:23), and destruction (19:18).<\/p>\nThe book of Proverbs speaks of discipline as necessary to avoid sexual immorality (5:12-23; 6:23-24). Loose or wicked women probably symbolize many kinds of deceptive and enticing situations. To be able to act maturely and responsibly in such situations requires that young people respond to wise and loving parental discipline so that they learn to live disciplined lives. They will then do by “bent of nature” what is right because their nature has been shaped to what it right. Evil can then be shunned, even when it is encountered unexpectedly.<\/p>\nThe book of Hebrews also urges its readers to respond to discipline rather than to react against it. In Hebrews two harmful reactions are stipulated and the helpful response is identified. On the one hand, no individual should regard lightly the discipline of the Lord (Heb 12:5). Discipline should be regarded neither as worthless nor as being of little value. On the other hand, one should not lose courage when he is punished by the Lord. That is, preoccupation with the negative aspect of the disciplinary procedure must not obscure its goal or demoralize persons being disciplined. There is a purpose for what happens, which should be sought and realized: “No discipline is enjoyable while it happening—it is painful! But afterward there will be a quiet harvest of right living for those who are trained in this way” (Heb 12:11, nlt<\/span>). The exhortation is not to reject discipline or be dejected by it, but to accept it and be instructed by it.<\/p>\nSelf-Discipline<\/p>\nJesus’ ethics of righteousness both fulfill and surpass the stringent code of the old covenant (Mt 5:17-48). Yet Christians are not therefore inherently more legalistic than were the Pharisees. Set free from “the law of sin and death,” Christians have “the law of the Spirit of life in Jesus Christ” (Rom 8:1-8) to provide a built-in dynamic to fulfill the will of God. Beyond slavish obedience to the letter of the law, believers are enabled by the indwelling Spirit of God to exercise self-discipline. Spiritual transformation is accompanied by renewal of the mind (Rom 12:2), which brings fresh understanding of oneself, one’s motivations, and one’s attitudes.<\/p>\n\nParental Discipline<\/p>\nThe family constitutes the basic unit of the human community. Within that cell of intimate relationships, parents are entrusted with the responsibility of guiding and correcting their children (Dt 6:7; Prv 22:6). The biblical view is essentially pessimistic about the perfectibility of human nature. Therefore, parents are urged not to leave children at the mercy of their own natural tendencies. Undisciplined children are potential victims of the powerful conditioning exerted by a predominantly pagan culture. To exercise their responsibilities properly, parents must model values, practices, and attitudes to their children, besides teaching them through instruction and correction.<\/p>\nThe parents’ educational task is best accomplished through positive means such as advice, exhortation, counseling, family devotions, and Christian training in church and Sunday school. But it also may require negative measures, such as prohibitions and disciplinary action. When verbal admonitions are not heeded by small children, punishment becomes an effective form of persuasion (Prv 13:24). Physical discipline, however, should be administered on the basis of clearly stated and understood principles. Christian parents must avoid punishing out of anger or personal animosity, and must never cause injury to a child. Physical discipline should be viewed as a last resort intended to obtain maximum educational results with minimum outrage to children (Eph 6:4).<\/p>\nHuman fallenness (Gn 3) means that self-centeredness infects even children (cf. Ps 51:5). Somehow children must learn respect for themselves and for others. Left on their own and then battered by a fallen society, they can become rebellious social misfits leaving a trail of heartache in their own lives and in the lives of other people. Love for one’s children does not preclude the use of negative disciplinary measures. As distasteful as they may seem to both parents and children, genuine love may require them. A family environment regulated by consistent and loving firmness will enhance the chances for children to mature as responsible and considerate individuals.<\/p>\nChurch Discipline<\/p>\nThe church is basically a large family of which each believer is a member. The nature of the church—as a community intended to reflect in the faith, worship, and lives of its members the true character of God—distinguishes it from all other groups.<\/p>\nAt the same time, the church is called to be an open community of concern, reaching out in compassion to desperately needy human beings. Christian lifestyles clearly differ from pagan lifestyles. That difference often creates a barrier isolating the “lost” from the very people who could extend to them God’s deliverance from loneliness, addictions, disorientation, broken relationships, and so on. The church has a responsibility not to place unscriptural obstacles in the way of its outreach to unbelievers, yet the tension between openness and purity is difficult to resolve. Without a careful balance, a church can easily become unduly restrictive or overly permissive. In either extreme its witness is impaired.<\/p>\nThe solution to the dilemma lies in formulating church discipline that is authentically biblical. The Scriptures provide the church with ample guidance for the formulation of standards of conduct (e.g., Ex 20:1-17; 1 Cor 5:11; 6:9-11; Eph 4:25-32; 5:1-21; Col 3:5-11). As those standards are spelled out, however, it is necessary to differentiate between biblical absolutes and cultural norms. For instance, though drunkenness is expressly forbidden in the NT, there is no scriptural prohibition on the drinking of wine. Some churches allow drinking but decry drunkenness, others recommend abstinence to their members, and still others make abstinence from alcoholic beverages a condition of membership. The NT, recognizing that conflict sometimes occurs between Christian liberty and Christian responsibility, gives guidelines for resolving such conflicts (1 Cor 8).<\/p>\nFor the sake of scriptural consistency and in order to be credible, church discipline should oppose sins of attitude with the same severity as for “gross sins.” The NT condemns immorality, murder, and drunkenness—but along with them envy, jealousy, anger, selfishness, complaining, and criticism. Each of the vices is an impediment to entering the kingdom of God (Gal 5:19-21). Unbelievers are often made to feel unwelcome in the church because of secondary matters such as smoking or drinking. Yet gossiping, complaining, and selfishness among church members are seldom exposed and properly disciplined. A more consistent position would promote the purity of the church and would also enhance its ministry as a supportive, accepting center of Christian love.<\/p>\nIn addition to affirming the necessity for discipline within the church, the NT delineates a procedure for carrying out disciplinary action (Mt 18:15-18; 1 Cor 5:3-13; Gal 6:1). Offenders are first to be approached and admonished privately. If they refuse to repent or mend their ways, the case is to be presented before the leadership of the church and then, if necessary, before the whole congregation. Should offenders persist in their error, they are to be ostracized, not out of vindictiveness but with the hope of bringing them to repentance and restoration (2 Thes 3:14-15).<\/p>\nThe Bible’s emphasis on the necessity for self-discipline, parental discipline, and church discipline seems underscored by the moral decline evident in many areas of modern society. God’s love, as depicted in the Bible and exemplified in Jesus Christ, is intended to teach all people how to live. Those who spurn God’s “positive reinforcement” encounter the negative aspects of his discipline. Christians who discipline themselves, their children, and each other in a loving way honor Christ and model his way of life, thus helping others to understand God’s purposes.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DISCIPLINE Learning that molds character and enforces correct behavior—from a Latin word meaning “instruction” or “training.” To discipline a person or a group means to put them in a state of good order so that they function in the way intended. Discipline, in spite of a popular misconception, is not inherently stern or harsh. Bible translators chose “disciple” as an appropriate term for one who learns by following. Preview • Biblical Teaching • Self-Discipline • Parental Discipline • Church ...","summary_en":"DISCIPLINE Learning that molds character and enforces correct behavior—from a Latin word meaning “instruction” or “training.” To discipline a person or a group means to put them in a state of good order so that they function in the way intended. Discipline, in spite of a popular misconception, is not inherently stern or harsh. Bible translators chose “disciple” as an appropriate term for one who learns by following. Preview • Biblical Teaching • Self-Discipline • Parental Discipline • Church ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":10959,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ephraim (Person)","title_en":"Ephraim (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>EPHRAIM (Person<\/span>)<\/h3>\nJoseph’s younger son, born of Joseph and Asenath before the seven years of famine in Egypt (Gn 41:52). He was the ancestor of an Israelite tribe, and his name came to designate the northern kingdom of Israel (Is 7:5, 8; Jer 31:18-20; Hos 5:3-5). Ephraim’s boyhood overlapped the last 17 years of his grandfather, the patriarch Jacob, who migrated to Egypt during the years of famine. Thus Ephraim could learn of God’s promises and blessings directly from Jacob. After Jacob exacted an oath from Joseph to bury him in Canaan he adopted his grandsons Ephraim and Manasseh. That adoption gave the two brothers the position and legal rights equal to Jacob’s eldest sons, Reuben and Simeon (Gn 48:5).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Ephraim, Tribe of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EPHRAIM (Person<\/span>)<\/h3>\nJoseph’s younger son, born of Joseph and Asenath before the seven years of famine in Egypt (Gn 41:52). He was the ancestor of an Israelite tribe, and his name came to designate the northern kingdom of Israel (Is 7:5, 8; Jer 31:18-20; Hos 5:3-5). Ephraim’s boyhood overlapped the last 17 years of his grandfather, the patriarch Jacob, who migrated to Egypt during the years of famine. Thus Ephraim could learn of God’s promises and blessings directly from Jacob. After Jacob exacted an oath from Joseph to bury him in Canaan he adopted his grandsons Ephraim and Manasseh. That adoption gave the two brothers the position and legal rights equal to Jacob’s eldest sons, Reuben and Simeon (Gn 48:5).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Ephraim, Tribe of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EPHRAIM (Person) Joseph’s younger son, born of Joseph and Asenath before the seven years of famine in Egypt (Gn 41:52). He was the ancestor of an Israelite tribe, and his name came to designate the northern kingdom of Israel (Is 7:5, 8; Jer 31:18-20; Hos 5:3-5). Ephraim’s boyhood overlapped the last 17 years of his grandfather, the patriarch Jacob, who migrated to Egypt during the years of famine. Thus Ephraim could learn of God’s promises and blessings directly from Jacob. After Jacob exacte...","summary_en":"EPHRAIM (Person) Joseph’s younger son, born of Joseph and Asenath before the seven years of famine in Egypt (Gn 41:52). He was the ancestor of an Israelite tribe, and his name came to designate the northern kingdom of Israel (Is 7:5, 8; Jer 31:18-20; Hos 5:3-5). Ephraim’s boyhood overlapped the last 17 years of his grandfather, the patriarch Jacob, who migrated to Egypt during the years of famine. Thus Ephraim could learn of God’s promises and blessings directly from Jacob. After Jacob exacte...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52522,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:18","content_ro":"31:18-19<\/strong> Israel<\/em> was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone<\/em> is the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:18-19<\/strong> Israel<\/em> was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone<\/em> is the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:18-19 Israel was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone is the Lord.","summary_en":"31:18-19 Israel was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone is the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80148,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:18","content_ro":"31:18-19<\/strong> Israel<\/em> was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone<\/em> is the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:18-19<\/strong> Israel<\/em> was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone<\/em> is the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:18-19 Israel was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone is the Lord.","summary_en":"31:18-19 Israel was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone is the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107774,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:18","content_ro":"31:18-19<\/strong> Israel<\/em> was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone<\/em> is the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:18-19<\/strong> Israel<\/em> was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone<\/em> is the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:18-19 Israel was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone is the Lord.","summary_en":"31:18-19 Israel was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone is the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135400,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:18","content_ro":"31:18-19<\/strong> Israel<\/em> was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone<\/em> is the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:18-19<\/strong> Israel<\/em> was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone<\/em> is the<\/em> Lord<\/span>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:18-19 Israel was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone is the Lord.","summary_en":"31:18-19 Israel was now repenting of its sins and humbly asking for restoration; the people realized that they had no power to redeem themselves. They were turning away from idols and affirming that God alone is the Lord.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":52523,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:19","content_ro":"31:19<\/strong> When the exiles realized the stupidity<\/em> of their sins, they were ashamed<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:19<\/strong> When the exiles realized the stupidity<\/em> of their sins, they were ashamed<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:19 When the exiles realized the stupidity of their sins, they were ashamed.","summary_en":"31:19 When the exiles realized the stupidity of their sins, they were ashamed.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80149,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:19","content_ro":"31:19<\/strong> When the exiles realized the stupidity<\/em> of their sins, they were ashamed<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:19<\/strong> When the exiles realized the stupidity<\/em> of their sins, they were ashamed<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:19 When the exiles realized the stupidity of their sins, they were ashamed.","summary_en":"31:19 When the exiles realized the stupidity of their sins, they were ashamed.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107775,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:19","content_ro":"31:19<\/strong> When the exiles realized the stupidity<\/em> of their sins, they were ashamed<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:19<\/strong> When the exiles realized the stupidity<\/em> of their sins, they were ashamed<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:19 When the exiles realized the stupidity of their sins, they were ashamed.","summary_en":"31:19 When the exiles realized the stupidity of their sins, they were ashamed.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135401,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:19","content_ro":"31:19<\/strong> When the exiles realized the stupidity<\/em> of their sins, they were ashamed<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"31:19<\/strong> When the exiles realized the stupidity<\/em> of their sins, they were ashamed<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:19 When the exiles realized the stupidity of their sins, they were ashamed.","summary_en":"31:19 When the exiles realized the stupidity of their sins, they were ashamed.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":25182,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mercy","title_en":"Mercy","content_ro":"<h3>MERCY<\/h3>\nA divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4).<\/p>\nThe biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meaning involved, such as “kindness,” “lovingkindness,” “goodness,” “grace,” “favor,” “pity,” “compassion,” and “steadfast love.” Prominent in the concept of mercy is the compassionate disposition to forgive offenders or adversaries and to help or spare them in their sorry plight.<\/p>\nTheological Significance<\/p>\nAt the heart of the concept of mercy is the love of God, which is freely manifested in his gracious saving acts on behalf of those to whom he has pledged himself in covenant relationship. In the OT it was his chosen people Israel whom he elected to be his own and to whom he showed mercy (Ex 33:19; Is 54:10; 63:9). God persistently puts up with his disobedient and wayward people and continuously seeks them out to draw them back to himself. The psalmist describes God as a father who pities his children who revere and trust him (Ps 103:13). Hosea pictures God as a loving father who looks down from heaven with a yearning heart of compassion upon his rebellious and wayward people (Hos 11; cf. Jer 31:20). He also regards Israel as an unfaithful and adulterous wife whom God loves as a faithful husband in spite of her apostate and sinful condition (Hos 1–3; cf. Is 54:4-8). Isaiah depicts God as a mother who has compassion on the son of her womb (Is 49:15). These pictures reveal God’s mercy in rich and different ways. Other dimensions include forgiveness and restoration to favor (2 Kgs 13:23; Is 54:8; Jl 2:18-32; Mi 7:18-20), and deliverance from distress and perils (Neh 9:19-21; Pss 40:11-17; 69:16-36; 79:8-9; Is 49:10).<\/p>\nBecause of what Israel as a covenant nation had learned about the steadfast love and faithfulness of God, devout Jews instinctively lifted their voices in petition for divine mercy and forgiveness in times of need, eloquently expressed in the penitential psalms (Pss 6; 32; 38; 51; 102; 130; 143), as well as other OT passages (Ex 34:6; Neh 9:17; Pss 57; 79; 86; 123; Is 33:1-6; Dn 9:3-19; Jl 2:13). It is the remembrance of God’s mercy that gives the repentant person the hope and assurance of divine favor and of reconciliation with the offended Lord.<\/p>\nIn the NT a very descriptive Greek word is used for Jesus’ mercy toward the needy (Mt 9:36; 14:14; 20:34). It expresses his pity and compassion by means of an intense verb literally translated “to be moved in one’s bowels.” The Hebrews regarded the bowels as the center of the affections, especially that of the most tender kindness. Jesus was described as being deeply moved in his inner feeling of benevolence toward the needy and spontaneously acting to relieve their suffering—to heal (Mt 20:34; Mk 1:41), to raise the dead (Lk 7:13), and to feed the hungry (Mt 15:32).<\/p>\nThe OT concept of God’s mercy expressed in his faithfulness to the covenant people is found also in the NT (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78; Eph 2:4; 1 Tm 1:2; 1 Pt 1:3; 2:10). The most characteristic use of mercy in the NT is that of God’s provision of salvation for mankind in Jesus Christ (Rom 11:30-32; Eph 2:4). God is “the Father of mercies” (2 Cor 1:3), which he bestows on those who believe in his Son. It is because he is “so rich in mercy” that he saved those who are spiritually dead and doomed by their sins (Eph 2:4-6). It is out of God’s mercy that one is forgiven and granted eternal life (1 Tm 1:13-16).<\/p>\nPeople’s Responsibility to Show Mercy to Others<\/p>\nBecause God has freely extended his mercy irrespective of worthiness or faithfulness, people are to respond by showing mercy to others, even though they do not deserve it or seek it. Indeed, people are commanded to be merciful, especially to the poor, the needy, widows, and orphans (Prv 14:31; 19:17; Mi 6:8; Zec 7:9-10; Col 3:12). God regards mercy more than the ritual sacrifice (Mt 9:13). God’s mercy in Christ actually puts people under obligation to act toward others as God himself has acted toward them. The Lord made mercy a foundation for his teaching (Mt 5:7; 9:13; 12:7; 23:23; Lk 6:36; 10:37; Jas 3:17). His coming was anticipated and announced in the context of the mercy that would characterize his mission (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78).<\/p>\nMembers of the Christian church are to show compassion and practical concern for each other. They are to give aid and relief, love and comfort to one another, as Christ freely gave to them in their need. The apostle James teaches the essential nature of such good works as being of the very essence of genuine faith (Jas 2:14-26). It was the mercy that the good Samaritan had toward the man who was beaten and robbed that was singled out by the Lord for special commendation (Lk 10:36-37). To be full of mercy is a distinguishing virtue of the citizens of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 5:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Grace; Love.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MERCY<\/h3>\nA divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4).<\/p>\nThe biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meaning involved, such as “kindness,” “lovingkindness,” “goodness,” “grace,” “favor,” “pity,” “compassion,” and “steadfast love.” Prominent in the concept of mercy is the compassionate disposition to forgive offenders or adversaries and to help or spare them in their sorry plight.<\/p>\nTheological Significance<\/p>\nAt the heart of the concept of mercy is the love of God, which is freely manifested in his gracious saving acts on behalf of those to whom he has pledged himself in covenant relationship. In the OT it was his chosen people Israel whom he elected to be his own and to whom he showed mercy (Ex 33:19; Is 54:10; 63:9). God persistently puts up with his disobedient and wayward people and continuously seeks them out to draw them back to himself. The psalmist describes God as a father who pities his children who revere and trust him (Ps 103:13). Hosea pictures God as a loving father who looks down from heaven with a yearning heart of compassion upon his rebellious and wayward people (Hos 11; cf. Jer 31:20). He also regards Israel as an unfaithful and adulterous wife whom God loves as a faithful husband in spite of her apostate and sinful condition (Hos 1–3; cf. Is 54:4-8). Isaiah depicts God as a mother who has compassion on the son of her womb (Is 49:15). These pictures reveal God’s mercy in rich and different ways. Other dimensions include forgiveness and restoration to favor (2 Kgs 13:23; Is 54:8; Jl 2:18-32; Mi 7:18-20), and deliverance from distress and perils (Neh 9:19-21; Pss 40:11-17; 69:16-36; 79:8-9; Is 49:10).<\/p>\nBecause of what Israel as a covenant nation had learned about the steadfast love and faithfulness of God, devout Jews instinctively lifted their voices in petition for divine mercy and forgiveness in times of need, eloquently expressed in the penitential psalms (Pss 6; 32; 38; 51; 102; 130; 143), as well as other OT passages (Ex 34:6; Neh 9:17; Pss 57; 79; 86; 123; Is 33:1-6; Dn 9:3-19; Jl 2:13). It is the remembrance of God’s mercy that gives the repentant person the hope and assurance of divine favor and of reconciliation with the offended Lord.<\/p>\nIn the NT a very descriptive Greek word is used for Jesus’ mercy toward the needy (Mt 9:36; 14:14; 20:34). It expresses his pity and compassion by means of an intense verb literally translated “to be moved in one’s bowels.” The Hebrews regarded the bowels as the center of the affections, especially that of the most tender kindness. Jesus was described as being deeply moved in his inner feeling of benevolence toward the needy and spontaneously acting to relieve their suffering—to heal (Mt 20:34; Mk 1:41), to raise the dead (Lk 7:13), and to feed the hungry (Mt 15:32).<\/p>\nThe OT concept of God’s mercy expressed in his faithfulness to the covenant people is found also in the NT (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78; Eph 2:4; 1 Tm 1:2; 1 Pt 1:3; 2:10). The most characteristic use of mercy in the NT is that of God’s provision of salvation for mankind in Jesus Christ (Rom 11:30-32; Eph 2:4). God is “the Father of mercies” (2 Cor 1:3), which he bestows on those who believe in his Son. It is because he is “so rich in mercy” that he saved those who are spiritually dead and doomed by their sins (Eph 2:4-6). It is out of God’s mercy that one is forgiven and granted eternal life (1 Tm 1:13-16).<\/p>\nPeople’s Responsibility to Show Mercy to Others<\/p>\nBecause God has freely extended his mercy irrespective of worthiness or faithfulness, people are to respond by showing mercy to others, even though they do not deserve it or seek it. Indeed, people are commanded to be merciful, especially to the poor, the needy, widows, and orphans (Prv 14:31; 19:17; Mi 6:8; Zec 7:9-10; Col 3:12). God regards mercy more than the ritual sacrifice (Mt 9:13). God’s mercy in Christ actually puts people under obligation to act toward others as God himself has acted toward them. The Lord made mercy a foundation for his teaching (Mt 5:7; 9:13; 12:7; 23:23; Lk 6:36; 10:37; Jas 3:17). His coming was anticipated and announced in the context of the mercy that would characterize his mission (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78).<\/p>\nMembers of the Christian church are to show compassion and practical concern for each other. They are to give aid and relief, love and comfort to one another, as Christ freely gave to them in their need. The apostle James teaches the essential nature of such good works as being of the very essence of genuine faith (Jas 2:14-26). It was the mercy that the good Samaritan had toward the man who was beaten and robbed that was singled out by the Lord for special commendation (Lk 10:36-37). To be full of mercy is a distinguishing virtue of the citizens of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 5:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Grace; Love.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MERCY A divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4). The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meani...","summary_en":"MERCY A divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4). The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meani...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52524,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:20","content_ro":"31:20<\/strong> The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).<\/p>","content_en":"31:20<\/strong> The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:20 The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).","summary_en":"31:20 The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80150,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:20","content_ro":"31:20<\/strong> The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).<\/p>","content_en":"31:20<\/strong> The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:20 The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).","summary_en":"31:20 The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107776,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:20","content_ro":"31:20<\/strong> The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).<\/p>","content_en":"31:20<\/strong> The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:20 The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).","summary_en":"31:20 The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135402,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:20","content_ro":"31:20<\/strong> The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).<\/p>","content_en":"31:20<\/strong> The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:20 The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).","summary_en":"31:20 The exiled people had been in the Lord’s memory all along. God responded to his people’s repentance with a father’s love for his wayward children (cp. Luke 15:11-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65400,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93026,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120652,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148278,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\nTime and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\nJesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\nIn the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":23981,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Maiden Maid","title_en":"Maiden Maid","content_ro":"<h3>MAID, MAIDEN<\/h3>\nYoung unmarried woman, often of the servant class. In the OT, five Hebrew words with varying shades of meaning are translated by the English word “maiden.”<\/p>\nOne of these words is ’amah<\/span>.<\/em> Various English translations of this word include “bondmaid,” “bondwoman,” “handmaid(en),” “maid(en),” “maid servant,” “female servant,” “female slave,” “slave girl,” and “girl.”<\/p>\nAnother term is shiphchah<\/span>.<\/em> This Hebrew word is of similar meaning to ’amah<\/span>.<\/em> It is translated variously as “handmaid,” “maid(en),” “female slave,” and “slave girl.” Although both shiphchah<\/span> and ’amah<\/span> refer to female slaves, shiphchah<\/span> seems to imply that a closer relationship existed between the slave and the family to whom she belonged. In the patriarchal story this term is often employed in reference both to female slaves in general and specifically to the concubines who were also slaves to the free wife of their husbands (Gn 16, 29–30).<\/p>\nStill another Hebrew term for “maiden” is bethulah<\/span>.<\/em> This term refers specifically to a virgin, or a young woman of marriageable age (Gn 24:16; Ex 22:16). The OT prophets sometimes used this term figuratively to refer to a city or country as a “virgin” (Jer 31:21; Am 5:2).<\/p>\nAnother word, na‘arah<\/span>,<\/em> is itself used in several ways in the OT. Often it refers to an unmarried girl (Est 2:4); at other times it is used in speaking of a servant (Est 4:4; Ru 2:23). This same word is the base of the proper name of a woman (Naarah, the wife of Ashhur, in 1 Chr 4:5-6) and of a city in Ephraim near Jericho (Jos 16:7).<\/p>\nFor many years controversy has surrounded the meaning of ‘almah<\/span>,<\/em> the word for maiden used in Isaiah 7:14. The dispute arises because of the varied definitions of the word throughout the OT (“girl,” “young woman,” “young woman of marriageable age, presumably a virgin”). Only context can accurately determine the meaning of ‘almah<\/span> in any given instance. Looking at Isaiah 7:14 from a NT perspective, ‘almah<\/span> is a reference to the virgin Mary, the mother of Jesus (see Mt 1:23).<\/p>\nSeveral Greek words are translated as “maiden” in the English NT. The meaning of korasion<\/span> is simply “girl,” “little girl,” or “maiden” (Mt 9:24-25). Another word, paidiske<\/span>,<\/em> originally referred to a “young woman” but later came to mean “a female slave,” “a servant-maid” or “a servant girl” (Mk 14:66; Lk 12:45). It is a diminutive of pais<\/span> (a Greek word denoting “a young girl,” “maiden,” or “child”) (Lk 8:51, 54). Numphe<\/span> is the Greek word meaning “young wife,” “bride,” and “daughter-in-law” (Lk 12:53; Rv 21:2). Parthenos<\/span> is the usual Greek term for “virgin” and occurs 14 times in the NT.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Slave, Slavery.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MAID, MAIDEN<\/h3>\nYoung unmarried woman, often of the servant class. In the OT, five Hebrew words with varying shades of meaning are translated by the English word “maiden.”<\/p>\nOne of these words is ’amah<\/span>.<\/em> Various English translations of this word include “bondmaid,” “bondwoman,” “handmaid(en),” “maid(en),” “maid servant,” “female servant,” “female slave,” “slave girl,” and “girl.”<\/p>\nAnother term is shiphchah<\/span>.<\/em> This Hebrew word is of similar meaning to ’amah<\/span>.<\/em> It is translated variously as “handmaid,” “maid(en),” “female slave,” and “slave girl.” Although both shiphchah<\/span> and ’amah<\/span> refer to female slaves, shiphchah<\/span> seems to imply that a closer relationship existed between the slave and the family to whom she belonged. In the patriarchal story this term is often employed in reference both to female slaves in general and specifically to the concubines who were also slaves to the free wife of their husbands (Gn 16, 29–30).<\/p>\nStill another Hebrew term for “maiden” is bethulah<\/span>.<\/em> This term refers specifically to a virgin, or a young woman of marriageable age (Gn 24:16; Ex 22:16). The OT prophets sometimes used this term figuratively to refer to a city or country as a “virgin” (Jer 31:21; Am 5:2).<\/p>\nAnother word, na‘arah<\/span>,<\/em> is itself used in several ways in the OT. Often it refers to an unmarried girl (Est 2:4); at other times it is used in speaking of a servant (Est 4:4; Ru 2:23). This same word is the base of the proper name of a woman (Naarah, the wife of Ashhur, in 1 Chr 4:5-6) and of a city in Ephraim near Jericho (Jos 16:7).<\/p>\nFor many years controversy has surrounded the meaning of ‘almah<\/span>,<\/em> the word for maiden used in Isaiah 7:14. The dispute arises because of the varied definitions of the word throughout the OT (“girl,” “young woman,” “young woman of marriageable age, presumably a virgin”). Only context can accurately determine the meaning of ‘almah<\/span> in any given instance. Looking at Isaiah 7:14 from a NT perspective, ‘almah<\/span> is a reference to the virgin Mary, the mother of Jesus (see Mt 1:23).<\/p>\nSeveral Greek words are translated as “maiden” in the English NT. The meaning of korasion<\/span> is simply “girl,” “little girl,” or “maiden” (Mt 9:24-25). Another word, paidiske<\/span>,<\/em> originally referred to a “young woman” but later came to mean “a female slave,” “a servant-maid” or “a servant girl” (Mk 14:66; Lk 12:45). It is a diminutive of pais<\/span> (a Greek word denoting “a young girl,” “maiden,” or “child”) (Lk 8:51, 54). Numphe<\/span> is the Greek word meaning “young wife,” “bride,” and “daughter-in-law” (Lk 12:53; Rv 21:2). Parthenos<\/span> is the usual Greek term for “virgin” and occurs 14 times in the NT.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Slave, Slavery.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MAID, MAIDEN Young unmarried woman, often of the servant class. In the OT, five Hebrew words with varying shades of meaning are translated by the English word “maiden.” One of these words is ’amah. Various English translations of this word include “bondmaid,” “bondwoman,” “handmaid(en),” “maid(en),” “maid servant,” “female servant,” “female slave,” “slave girl,” and “girl.” Another term is shiphchah. This Hebrew word is of similar meaning to ’amah. It is translated variously as “handmaid,” “m...","summary_en":"MAID, MAIDEN Young unmarried woman, often of the servant class. In the OT, five Hebrew words with varying shades of meaning are translated by the English word “maiden.” One of these words is ’amah. Various English translations of this word include “bondmaid,” “bondwoman,” “handmaid(en),” “maid(en),” “maid servant,” “female servant,” “female slave,” “slave girl,” and “girl.” Another term is shiphchah. This Hebrew word is of similar meaning to ’amah. It is translated variously as “handmaid,” “m...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37641,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Travel","title_en":"Travel","content_ro":"<h3>TRAVEL<\/h3>\nIn biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine.<\/p>\n\nTravel in Old Testament Times<\/p>\nSeveral accounts depict the people of Israel moving over restricted areas to graze their flocks. Joseph’s brothers took their flocks from the south of the land up to Shechem and then to Dothan (Gn 37:12-17), but this was a mere 60 miles (96.5 kilometers). David traveled around Palestine and even went to Moab (1 Sm 22:3). The Danites moved from their home southwest of Jerusalem to the north, just south of the Lebanon Mountains (Jgs 18).<\/p>\nExamples of travel for pasturage, migration, and protection could be multiplied. Such travelers would normally walk, though the ass was used both for riding and as a pack animal. The ox was employed for transporting heavy loads and sometimes for people (Gn 46:5). Later the camel came into general use (1 Kgs 10:2; 2 Kgs 8:9). Little is known of resting places for travelers in OT times. There are only a few references to a “lodging place” (malon<\/span>) in OT narratives (Gn 42:27; 43:21; Ex 4:24).<\/p>\nTravel in New Testament Times<\/p>\nThe Roman world knew a great deal of travel: to fulfill religious obligations at festival time, for trade, for government administration, for military purposes. Not the least among first-century travelers were the early Christian missionaries.<\/p>\nThe advent of Roman peace and authority and the construction of well-made stone roads made travel relatively safe and quick. The modes of travel improved over that known in OT times. Long distances were traveled within the Roman Empire over good roads and in comparative safety. There were some hazards, however, notably in sea travel, from wind, storms, and pirates (Acts 15:39; 18:18-22; Rom 15:24-25; 2 Cor 11:25-26). Paul’s sea journey to Rome, for example, was perilous (Acts 27:1–28:14).<\/p>\nThe NT mentions a number of journeys on foot. Mary journeyed from Galilee to Judea to visit Elizabeth (Lk 1:39-40, 56). The baby Jesus was born in Bethlehem during the census (2:1-7); Jesus was brought to Jerusalem to comply with the Jewish purification law (v 22). Thus three trips were made from Nazareth to Jerusalem, a distance of about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers), from the time of Jesus’ conception to Mary’s purification. The annual Passover visit was made by Joseph and Mary (vv 41-51). Other journeys are mentioned (Jn 2:13; 5:1; 7:1-10; 12:1). Jesus himself walked to Jericho from Galilee (Mk 1:1-11) and also to the region of Tyre and Sidon (7:24). He was in Samaria more than once (Lk 17:11; Jn 4:4). His last journey to Jerusalem was via Jericho and up through the hills to Jerusalem (Mk 10:1, 46; 11:1). His last journey after the resurrection was to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-35).<\/p>\nPaul traveled by sea on each of his missionary journeys (Acts 13:1-14; 15:41–18:22; 18:23–21:17), generally accompanied by friends. He also made many journeys on foot in Palestine, Asia Minor, and the Greek peninsula. But not all travel was on foot in NT times. The ass, used for carrying loads, often carried people. Jesus once rode from Bethphage to Jerusalem, a short but highly symbolic journey (Mt 21:2-7; Mk 11:1-11; Jn 12:12-15). When Joseph traveled with his pregnant wife, Mary, to Bethlehem for the census at the time of Jesus’ birth, Mary probably rode on an ass. The Ethiopian eunuch was riding in a chariot after worshiping at Jerusalem and was joined by Philip traveling on foot (Acts 8:26-38). Roman soldiers both marched and made wide use of horses. When Paul was brought to Caesarea from Jerusalem, mounts were prepared for him (23:23-24).<\/p>\nRoads and Sea Lanes<\/p>\nThe roads of biblical times figured prominently in the geography, topography, and history of Palestine—a land that served as a bridge between Egypt and centers of civilization and trade in the Middle East. Many of the roads were strategically important, both commercially and militarily. Some roads gained significance as pilgrim routes to facilitate travel to religious centers like Jerusalem. Roads in biblical times were of three main types: long-distance international roads, medium-distance intraregional roads, and a variety of roads inside each region or state.<\/p>\n<h5>Great International Roads<\/h5>\nThese linked the Mediterranean coast to the northern Tigris Valley and southern Mesopotamia. Some linked Mesopotamia to Asia Minor, while others led south to Egypt, either along the coast or east of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea and across the Sinai Peninsula. There were trade routes between Anatolia and Assyria early in the second millennium BC<\/span>. Apparently the military campaign referred to in Genesis 14 aimed to secure the great trade route, the King’s Highway, from northern Mesopotamia to Egypt. Military invaders and travelers from Babylonia, Assyria, and Persia would head across the hinterlands of Syria toward the coast before turning south into Palestine and Egypt. The advent of European powers, Greece and Rome, into the Middle East opened up another vast network of international roads for the peoples of the East. Until Roman times, these roads were not surfaced with stone but were cleared pathways. They were very rough, ungraded, and in wet weather, impassable in many places. But they were evidently well defined by “waymarks” and “guideposts” (Jer 31:21). With the coming of the Romans, important roads were built with deep foundations and with large blocks of flat stone at the surface. The remains of these roads are still seen in many places in the Middle East and in Europe. Distance markers or milestones were regularly placed along the roads.<\/p>\n<h5>International North-South Roads in Palestine<\/h5>\nThe roads that linked countries to the north with Egypt passed through Palestine, a natural land bridge. There were three major roads. The coastal road began in Damascus and passed via Hazor across the plain of Esdraelon, through the Megiddo Pass, down the coast past Gaza and into Egypt. This was probably “the way of the sea” (Is 9:1). The Sinai road led from Egypt into the southern Negev and then to Kadesh-barnea, Beersheba, Hebron, Jerusalem, Shechem, Acco, Tyre, and Sidon. The Red Sea road entered the Palestine area from the Gulf of Aqaba, where the ancient port of Elath and Solomon’s port of Ezion-geber stood (Nm 33:35; 2 Chr 8:17). From there it led through the mountainous areas of Transjordan, crossing the deep wadis and then north through the Hauran region to Damascus. This was the road taken by caravans from southern Arabia to Damascus, the ancient King’s Highway (Nm 20:17; 21:22).<\/p>\nThere were other north-south roads of lesser importance. One coastal road led from Joppa via Caesarea and Dor to Acco, where it linked with the Sinai road. Evidently it was not very significant until Roman times, when the port of Caesarea was built. The marshes in the plain of Sharon posed many problems. The plain of Esdraelon was also marshy and interrupted the roads north in bad seasons. A raised road across the swampy sections was eventually constructed. Another road led north from Hazor, branching off the main trunk road to Damascus. The Jordan Valley road skirted the southwestern part of Galilee and led down the Jordan Valley to Jericho.<\/p>\n<h5>East-West Roads<\/h5>\nSeveral important roads ran east-west, intersecting the larger roads leading north. One such road led from Gaza to Beersheba and then down the Arabah, with an offshoot to Petra. Another led from Ashkelon, via Gath, to Hebron and on to En-gedi on the Dead Sea. Another road led from Joppa east up the valley of Aijalon (Jos 10:6-14) to Bethel and on to Jericho. One well-used road led from Joppa to Shechem, across the Jordan at Adam (3:16) and into Gilead in Transjordan. Other roads led from Acco eastward to Galilee and also up the coast to Tyre and Sidon. There were, indeed, numerous east-west roads that provided contact between various parts of Palestine. In Roman times, when the speedy movement of armies was essential, some of the old roads were greatly improved and new ones built.<\/p>\n<h5>Sea Lanes<\/h5>\nThe people of Israel, unlike the Phoenicians, seldom used the sea lanes. When Solomon planned to send ships down the Red Sea to Ophir (1 Kgs 9:26-28), he used Phoenician seamen. Jehoshaphat planned a similar expedition, but his ships were wrecked (22:48-49). Coastal traffic in OT times was in the hands of Philistines and Phoenicians. There were several ports along the Mediterranean Sea coast, such as Gaza, Joppa, Dor, and Acco, but none was very good. There were also sea lanes linking the Mediterranean coast with Egypt and distant Tarshish (probably Spain). The other coastal water was the Gulf of Aqaba with its two ports—Ezion-geber for Transjordan, and Elath for west of the Jordan. Solomon’s fleet used Ezion-geber as its home port.<\/p>\n\nIn NT times things changed considerably. The Middle East produced commodities used by peoples farther west, especially the Romans. Alexandria in Egypt and Antioch in Syria handled both cargo and travelers. Smaller ports like those in Palestine and many others around the coast of Asia Minor provided a haven for ships. One ingenious scheme to avoid a 200-mile (321.8-kilometer) journey around the Greek peninsula was to drag small boats across the five-mile- (8-kilometer-) wide isthmus at Corinth. Even the largest ship in NT times was in danger from wind and storm at sea (Acts 27), so sea travel was undertaken preferably when the risk of storms was minimal, roughly from November to March. There was a lot of sea traffic in the Mediterranean Sea at appropriate seasons, largely for trade. Grain ships crossed regularly from Rome to Egypt and to the east.<\/p>\nShips were driven by sail power supplemented as necessary by oars operated by slaves. Some indication of the size of ships comes from the discovery of ancient wrecks and from Latin and Greek literature. An old dry dock 130 feet (39.6 meters) long found near Athens was once used for Greek war vessels, which were smaller than the cargo vessels. The Roman writer Lucian refers to an Alexandrian grain ship 180 feet (54.9 meters) long, suggesting a capacity of about 1,200 tons (1,088.6 metric tons). Paul’s ship carried 276 persons (Acts 27:37). Modern underwater archaeology is providing valuable information about these ancient ships.<\/p>\n<h5>Reasons for Travel<\/h5>\nThe most important reason for travel in NT times was for trade and commerce, which involved far more than merely transporting goods. There were agents, supervisors, insurers of cargo, bankers, and a whole range of people involved in the acquisition and safe delivery of the cargo.<\/p>\nMilitary travel was considerable. A wide variety of tasks had to be undertaken in the way of reconnaissance, procuring of supplies, forward arrangements for the bivouacking of troops, and the transport of both troops and equipment.<\/p>\nSome travelers were tradespeople changing their place of employment, like Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2-3). Aquila had traveled from Pontus on the Black Sea to Rome and then, in a time of persecution, he had fled to Corinth with his wife. Many others traveled for similar reasons.<\/p>\nPeople on religious pilgrimage traveled by land or sea. Jews from many lands journeyed to Jerusalem for the annual Passover festivities (cf. Acts 2:5-11). Non-Jews went to religious centers at Ephesus, Athens, and Eleusis, where there were important temples. Many minor temples also attracted pilgrims. The construction of new temples and a variety of government administration buildings brought craftsmen from afar. Often the materials used in construction had to be transported to the site. Some people made trips for health reasons to temples famed for healing miracles or to enjoy the benefits of hot springs like those at Capernaum or Tiberias. Athletes traveled to centers for important contests like the Olympic games, and crowds of people flocked to witness the spectacle. Some travelers were students or teachers going to great centers of learning—the universities of those times. Yet others traveled as official emissaries bearing important government and commercial documents. Despite all this activity, vast numbers of ordinary citizens hardly ever traveled more than a few miles from their homes.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TRAVEL<\/h3>\nIn biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine.<\/p>\n\nTravel in Old Testament Times<\/p>\nSeveral accounts depict the people of Israel moving over restricted areas to graze their flocks. Joseph’s brothers took their flocks from the south of the land up to Shechem and then to Dothan (Gn 37:12-17), but this was a mere 60 miles (96.5 kilometers). David traveled around Palestine and even went to Moab (1 Sm 22:3). The Danites moved from their home southwest of Jerusalem to the north, just south of the Lebanon Mountains (Jgs 18).<\/p>\nExamples of travel for pasturage, migration, and protection could be multiplied. Such travelers would normally walk, though the ass was used both for riding and as a pack animal. The ox was employed for transporting heavy loads and sometimes for people (Gn 46:5). Later the camel came into general use (1 Kgs 10:2; 2 Kgs 8:9). Little is known of resting places for travelers in OT times. There are only a few references to a “lodging place” (malon<\/span>) in OT narratives (Gn 42:27; 43:21; Ex 4:24).<\/p>\nTravel in New Testament Times<\/p>\nThe Roman world knew a great deal of travel: to fulfill religious obligations at festival time, for trade, for government administration, for military purposes. Not the least among first-century travelers were the early Christian missionaries.<\/p>\nThe advent of Roman peace and authority and the construction of well-made stone roads made travel relatively safe and quick. The modes of travel improved over that known in OT times. Long distances were traveled within the Roman Empire over good roads and in comparative safety. There were some hazards, however, notably in sea travel, from wind, storms, and pirates (Acts 15:39; 18:18-22; Rom 15:24-25; 2 Cor 11:25-26). Paul’s sea journey to Rome, for example, was perilous (Acts 27:1–28:14).<\/p>\nThe NT mentions a number of journeys on foot. Mary journeyed from Galilee to Judea to visit Elizabeth (Lk 1:39-40, 56). The baby Jesus was born in Bethlehem during the census (2:1-7); Jesus was brought to Jerusalem to comply with the Jewish purification law (v 22). Thus three trips were made from Nazareth to Jerusalem, a distance of about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers), from the time of Jesus’ conception to Mary’s purification. The annual Passover visit was made by Joseph and Mary (vv 41-51). Other journeys are mentioned (Jn 2:13; 5:1; 7:1-10; 12:1). Jesus himself walked to Jericho from Galilee (Mk 1:1-11) and also to the region of Tyre and Sidon (7:24). He was in Samaria more than once (Lk 17:11; Jn 4:4). His last journey to Jerusalem was via Jericho and up through the hills to Jerusalem (Mk 10:1, 46; 11:1). His last journey after the resurrection was to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-35).<\/p>\nPaul traveled by sea on each of his missionary journeys (Acts 13:1-14; 15:41–18:22; 18:23–21:17), generally accompanied by friends. He also made many journeys on foot in Palestine, Asia Minor, and the Greek peninsula. But not all travel was on foot in NT times. The ass, used for carrying loads, often carried people. Jesus once rode from Bethphage to Jerusalem, a short but highly symbolic journey (Mt 21:2-7; Mk 11:1-11; Jn 12:12-15). When Joseph traveled with his pregnant wife, Mary, to Bethlehem for the census at the time of Jesus’ birth, Mary probably rode on an ass. The Ethiopian eunuch was riding in a chariot after worshiping at Jerusalem and was joined by Philip traveling on foot (Acts 8:26-38). Roman soldiers both marched and made wide use of horses. When Paul was brought to Caesarea from Jerusalem, mounts were prepared for him (23:23-24).<\/p>\nRoads and Sea Lanes<\/p>\nThe roads of biblical times figured prominently in the geography, topography, and history of Palestine—a land that served as a bridge between Egypt and centers of civilization and trade in the Middle East. Many of the roads were strategically important, both commercially and militarily. Some roads gained significance as pilgrim routes to facilitate travel to religious centers like Jerusalem. Roads in biblical times were of three main types: long-distance international roads, medium-distance intraregional roads, and a variety of roads inside each region or state.<\/p>\n<h5>Great International Roads<\/h5>\nThese linked the Mediterranean coast to the northern Tigris Valley and southern Mesopotamia. Some linked Mesopotamia to Asia Minor, while others led south to Egypt, either along the coast or east of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea and across the Sinai Peninsula. There were trade routes between Anatolia and Assyria early in the second millennium BC<\/span>. Apparently the military campaign referred to in Genesis 14 aimed to secure the great trade route, the King’s Highway, from northern Mesopotamia to Egypt. Military invaders and travelers from Babylonia, Assyria, and Persia would head across the hinterlands of Syria toward the coast before turning south into Palestine and Egypt. The advent of European powers, Greece and Rome, into the Middle East opened up another vast network of international roads for the peoples of the East. Until Roman times, these roads were not surfaced with stone but were cleared pathways. They were very rough, ungraded, and in wet weather, impassable in many places. But they were evidently well defined by “waymarks” and “guideposts” (Jer 31:21). With the coming of the Romans, important roads were built with deep foundations and with large blocks of flat stone at the surface. The remains of these roads are still seen in many places in the Middle East and in Europe. Distance markers or milestones were regularly placed along the roads.<\/p>\n<h5>International North-South Roads in Palestine<\/h5>\nThe roads that linked countries to the north with Egypt passed through Palestine, a natural land bridge. There were three major roads. The coastal road began in Damascus and passed via Hazor across the plain of Esdraelon, through the Megiddo Pass, down the coast past Gaza and into Egypt. This was probably “the way of the sea” (Is 9:1). The Sinai road led from Egypt into the southern Negev and then to Kadesh-barnea, Beersheba, Hebron, Jerusalem, Shechem, Acco, Tyre, and Sidon. The Red Sea road entered the Palestine area from the Gulf of Aqaba, where the ancient port of Elath and Solomon’s port of Ezion-geber stood (Nm 33:35; 2 Chr 8:17). From there it led through the mountainous areas of Transjordan, crossing the deep wadis and then north through the Hauran region to Damascus. This was the road taken by caravans from southern Arabia to Damascus, the ancient King’s Highway (Nm 20:17; 21:22).<\/p>\nThere were other north-south roads of lesser importance. One coastal road led from Joppa via Caesarea and Dor to Acco, where it linked with the Sinai road. Evidently it was not very significant until Roman times, when the port of Caesarea was built. The marshes in the plain of Sharon posed many problems. The plain of Esdraelon was also marshy and interrupted the roads north in bad seasons. A raised road across the swampy sections was eventually constructed. Another road led north from Hazor, branching off the main trunk road to Damascus. The Jordan Valley road skirted the southwestern part of Galilee and led down the Jordan Valley to Jericho.<\/p>\n<h5>East-West Roads<\/h5>\nSeveral important roads ran east-west, intersecting the larger roads leading north. One such road led from Gaza to Beersheba and then down the Arabah, with an offshoot to Petra. Another led from Ashkelon, via Gath, to Hebron and on to En-gedi on the Dead Sea. Another road led from Joppa east up the valley of Aijalon (Jos 10:6-14) to Bethel and on to Jericho. One well-used road led from Joppa to Shechem, across the Jordan at Adam (3:16) and into Gilead in Transjordan. Other roads led from Acco eastward to Galilee and also up the coast to Tyre and Sidon. There were, indeed, numerous east-west roads that provided contact between various parts of Palestine. In Roman times, when the speedy movement of armies was essential, some of the old roads were greatly improved and new ones built.<\/p>\n<h5>Sea Lanes<\/h5>\nThe people of Israel, unlike the Phoenicians, seldom used the sea lanes. When Solomon planned to send ships down the Red Sea to Ophir (1 Kgs 9:26-28), he used Phoenician seamen. Jehoshaphat planned a similar expedition, but his ships were wrecked (22:48-49). Coastal traffic in OT times was in the hands of Philistines and Phoenicians. There were several ports along the Mediterranean Sea coast, such as Gaza, Joppa, Dor, and Acco, but none was very good. There were also sea lanes linking the Mediterranean coast with Egypt and distant Tarshish (probably Spain). The other coastal water was the Gulf of Aqaba with its two ports—Ezion-geber for Transjordan, and Elath for west of the Jordan. Solomon’s fleet used Ezion-geber as its home port.<\/p>\n\nIn NT times things changed considerably. The Middle East produced commodities used by peoples farther west, especially the Romans. Alexandria in Egypt and Antioch in Syria handled both cargo and travelers. Smaller ports like those in Palestine and many others around the coast of Asia Minor provided a haven for ships. One ingenious scheme to avoid a 200-mile (321.8-kilometer) journey around the Greek peninsula was to drag small boats across the five-mile- (8-kilometer-) wide isthmus at Corinth. Even the largest ship in NT times was in danger from wind and storm at sea (Acts 27), so sea travel was undertaken preferably when the risk of storms was minimal, roughly from November to March. There was a lot of sea traffic in the Mediterranean Sea at appropriate seasons, largely for trade. Grain ships crossed regularly from Rome to Egypt and to the east.<\/p>\nShips were driven by sail power supplemented as necessary by oars operated by slaves. Some indication of the size of ships comes from the discovery of ancient wrecks and from Latin and Greek literature. An old dry dock 130 feet (39.6 meters) long found near Athens was once used for Greek war vessels, which were smaller than the cargo vessels. The Roman writer Lucian refers to an Alexandrian grain ship 180 feet (54.9 meters) long, suggesting a capacity of about 1,200 tons (1,088.6 metric tons). Paul’s ship carried 276 persons (Acts 27:37). Modern underwater archaeology is providing valuable information about these ancient ships.<\/p>\n<h5>Reasons for Travel<\/h5>\nThe most important reason for travel in NT times was for trade and commerce, which involved far more than merely transporting goods. There were agents, supervisors, insurers of cargo, bankers, and a whole range of people involved in the acquisition and safe delivery of the cargo.<\/p>\nMilitary travel was considerable. A wide variety of tasks had to be undertaken in the way of reconnaissance, procuring of supplies, forward arrangements for the bivouacking of troops, and the transport of both troops and equipment.<\/p>\nSome travelers were tradespeople changing their place of employment, like Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2-3). Aquila had traveled from Pontus on the Black Sea to Rome and then, in a time of persecution, he had fled to Corinth with his wife. Many others traveled for similar reasons.<\/p>\nPeople on religious pilgrimage traveled by land or sea. Jews from many lands journeyed to Jerusalem for the annual Passover festivities (cf. Acts 2:5-11). Non-Jews went to religious centers at Ephesus, Athens, and Eleusis, where there were important temples. Many minor temples also attracted pilgrims. The construction of new temples and a variety of government administration buildings brought craftsmen from afar. Often the materials used in construction had to be transported to the site. Some people made trips for health reasons to temples famed for healing miracles or to enjoy the benefits of hot springs like those at Capernaum or Tiberias. Athletes traveled to centers for important contests like the Olympic games, and crowds of people flocked to witness the spectacle. Some travelers were students or teachers going to great centers of learning—the universities of those times. Yet others traveled as official emissaries bearing important government and commercial documents. Despite all this activity, vast numbers of ordinary citizens hardly ever traveled more than a few miles from their homes.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TRAVEL In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine. Travel in Old Testament Times Several accounts depict the peop...","summary_en":"TRAVEL In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine. Travel in Old Testament Times Several accounts depict the peop...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52525,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:21","content_ro":"31:21<\/strong> road signs . . . guideposts:<\/em> The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.<\/p>","content_en":"31:21<\/strong> road signs . . . guideposts:<\/em> The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:21 road signs . . . guideposts: The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.","summary_en":"31:21 road signs . . . guideposts: The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80151,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:21","content_ro":"31:21<\/strong> road signs . . . guideposts:<\/em> The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.<\/p>","content_en":"31:21<\/strong> road signs . . . guideposts:<\/em> The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:21 road signs . . . guideposts: The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.","summary_en":"31:21 road signs . . . guideposts: The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107777,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:21","content_ro":"31:21<\/strong> road signs . . . guideposts:<\/em> The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.<\/p>","content_en":"31:21<\/strong> road signs . . . guideposts:<\/em> The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:21 road signs . . . guideposts: The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.","summary_en":"31:21 road signs . . . guideposts: The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135403,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:21","content_ro":"31:21<\/strong> road signs . . . guideposts:<\/em> The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.<\/p>","content_en":"31:21<\/strong> road signs . . . guideposts:<\/em> The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:21 road signs . . . guideposts: The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.","summary_en":"31:21 road signs . . . guideposts: The Lord guided his people physically back to the land of Israel and spiritually back to their covenant relationship with him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"26":[{"id":52526,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:26","content_ro":"31:26<\/strong> Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep<\/em> was very sweet<\/em>,<\/em> like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).<\/p>","content_en":"31:26<\/strong> Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep<\/em> was very sweet<\/em>,<\/em> like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:26 Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep was very sweet, like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).","summary_en":"31:26 Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep was very sweet, like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80152,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:26","content_ro":"31:26<\/strong> Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep<\/em> was very sweet<\/em>,<\/em> like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).<\/p>","content_en":"31:26<\/strong> Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep<\/em> was very sweet<\/em>,<\/em> like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:26 Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep was very sweet, like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).","summary_en":"31:26 Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep was very sweet, like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107778,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:26","content_ro":"31:26<\/strong> Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep<\/em> was very sweet<\/em>,<\/em> like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).<\/p>","content_en":"31:26<\/strong> Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep<\/em> was very sweet<\/em>,<\/em> like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:26 Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep was very sweet, like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).","summary_en":"31:26 Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep was very sweet, like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135404,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:26","content_ro":"31:26<\/strong> Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep<\/em> was very sweet<\/em>,<\/em> like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).<\/p>","content_en":"31:26<\/strong> Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep<\/em> was very sweet<\/em>,<\/em> like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:26 Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep was very sweet, like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).","summary_en":"31:26 Evidently, either Jeremiah or his scribe had fallen asleep and was awakened with a start. His sleep was very sweet, like the rest and joy promised by the Lord (31:25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":52527,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:27","content_ro":"31:27<\/strong> A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah<\/em> would be their population<\/em> growth and the number of animals<\/em> grazing in their pastures.<\/p>","content_en":"31:27<\/strong> A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah<\/em> would be their population<\/em> growth and the number of animals<\/em> grazing in their pastures.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:27 A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah would be their population growth and the number of animals grazing in their pastures.","summary_en":"31:27 A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah would be their population growth and the number of animals grazing in their pastures.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80153,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:27","content_ro":"31:27<\/strong> A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah<\/em> would be their population<\/em> growth and the number of animals<\/em> grazing in their pastures.<\/p>","content_en":"31:27<\/strong> A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah<\/em> would be their population<\/em> growth and the number of animals<\/em> grazing in their pastures.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:27 A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah would be their population growth and the number of animals grazing in their pastures.","summary_en":"31:27 A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah would be their population growth and the number of animals grazing in their pastures.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107779,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:27","content_ro":"31:27<\/strong> A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah<\/em> would be their population<\/em> growth and the number of animals<\/em> grazing in their pastures.<\/p>","content_en":"31:27<\/strong> A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah<\/em> would be their population<\/em> growth and the number of animals<\/em> grazing in their pastures.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:27 A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah would be their population growth and the number of animals grazing in their pastures.","summary_en":"31:27 A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah would be their population growth and the number of animals grazing in their pastures.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135405,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:27","content_ro":"31:27<\/strong> A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah<\/em> would be their population<\/em> growth and the number of animals<\/em> grazing in their pastures.<\/p>","content_en":"31:27<\/strong> A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah<\/em> would be their population<\/em> growth and the number of animals<\/em> grazing in their pastures.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:27 A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah would be their population growth and the number of animals grazing in their pastures.","summary_en":"31:27 A clear indication of the Lord’s care for Israel and Judah would be their population growth and the number of animals grazing in their pastures.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":52528,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:28","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:28","content_ro":"31:28<\/strong> The future<\/em> refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant<\/em> and build<\/em> (see 1:10).<\/p>","content_en":"31:28<\/strong> The future<\/em> refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant<\/em> and build<\/em> (see 1:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:28 The future refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant and build (see 1:10).","summary_en":"31:28 The future refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant and build (see 1:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80154,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:28","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:28","content_ro":"31:28<\/strong> The future<\/em> refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant<\/em> and build<\/em> (see 1:10).<\/p>","content_en":"31:28<\/strong> The future<\/em> refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant<\/em> and build<\/em> (see 1:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:28 The future refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant and build (see 1:10).","summary_en":"31:28 The future refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant and build (see 1:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107780,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:28","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:28","content_ro":"31:28<\/strong> The future<\/em> refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant<\/em> and build<\/em> (see 1:10).<\/p>","content_en":"31:28<\/strong> The future<\/em> refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant<\/em> and build<\/em> (see 1:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:28 The future refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant and build (see 1:10).","summary_en":"31:28 The future refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant and build (see 1:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135406,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:28","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:28","content_ro":"31:28<\/strong> The future<\/em> refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant<\/em> and build<\/em> (see 1:10).<\/p>","content_en":"31:28<\/strong> The future<\/em> refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant<\/em> and build<\/em> (see 1:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:28 The future refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant and build (see 1:10).","summary_en":"31:28 The future refers to the return of the exiled people to the Promised Land, whom the Lord had promised to plant and build (see 1:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":525,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Adam (Person)","title_en":"Adam (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>ADAM (Person<\/span>)<\/h3>\nFirst man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nThe creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the first humans were created male and female in God’s image with his specific mandate to populate and rule over the earth. With regard to the rest of creation the first humans were, on one hand, part of it, being created on the same day as other land animals; on the other hand, they were distinctly above it, being the culmination of the creation process and sole bearers of God’s image.<\/p>\nThe intent of the second account is much more specific (2:4–3:24); it seeks to explain the origin of the present human condition of sin and death and to set the stage for the drama of redemption. The story treats in detail aspects of Adam’s creation omitted from the first story. For example, it tells of the formation of Adam from the dust of the ground and of his receiving the breath of life from God (2:7). It recounts the planting of the Garden and the responsibility given to Adam to cultivate it (2:8-15). God’s instruction to Adam that the fruit of every tree in the Garden was his for food, except one, is carefully recorded, as well as the solemn warning that the fruit of the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” was never to be eaten, under the pain of death (2:16-17). Adam’s loneliness after naming the animals and not finding a suitable companion is also described, thus introducing the creation of the first woman (2:18-22). The creation of Eve from Adam’s rib poignantly portrays the essential unity of spirit and purpose of the sexes intended by God.<\/p>\nThe story does not end on such a positive note, however. It moves on to record the great deception Satan played upon Eve through the serpent. By clever insinuations and distortion of God’s original commandment (cf. 3:1 with 2:16-17), the serpent tricked Eve into eating the forbidden fruit and sharing it with Adam. Eve seems to have eaten because she was deceived (1 Tm 2:14), Adam out of a willful and conscious rebellion. Ironically, the two beings originally created in God’s image and likeness believed that they could become “like” God by disobeying him (Gn 3:5).<\/p>\nThe effects of their disobedience were immediate, though not at all what Adam had expected. For the first time a barrier of shame disrupted the unity of man and woman (3:7). More important, a barrier of real moral guilt was erected between the first couple and God. The story relates that when God came looking for Adam after his rebellion, he was hiding among the trees, already aware of his separation from God (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam threw the blame on Eve and, by implication, back on God: “It was the woman you gave me who brought me the fruit” (3:12, nlt<\/span>). Eve in turn blamed the serpent (3:13).<\/p>\nAccording to the story in Genesis, God held all three responsible and informed each one of the calamitous consequences of their rebellion (3:14-19). The two great mandates, originally signs of pure blessing, became mixed with curse and pain—the earth could now be populated only through the woman’s birth pangs and could be subdued only by the man’s labor and perspiration (3:16-18). Further, the unity of man and woman would be strained by man’s subjugation of her, or possibly by the beginning of a struggle for dominance between them (3:16b can be taken both ways). Finally, God pronounced the ultimate consequence: as he had originally warned, Adam and Eve were to die. Someday the breath of life would be taken from them, and their bodies would return to the dust from which they were made (3:19). That very day they also experienced a “spiritual” death; they were separated from God, the giver of life, and from the tree of life, the symbol of eternal life (3:22). God sent them out of Eden, and there was no way back. The entrance to paradise was blocked by the cherubim and flaming sword (3:23-24). Only God could restore what they had lost.<\/p>\nThe story is not devoid of hope. God was merciful even then. He made them garments of skin to cover their bodies and promised that someday the power of Satan behind the serpent would be crushed by the woman’s “seed” (Gn 3:15; cf. Rom 16:20). Many scholars consider that promise to be the first biblical mention of redemption.<\/p>\nThe Significance of Adam<\/p>\nAdam’s significance is based upon several assumptions, the first being that he was a historical individual. That assumption was made by many OT writers (Gn 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7). The NT writers agreed (Lk 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tm 2:13-14; Jude 1:14). Equally essential to Adam’s significance is a second assumption, that he was more than an individual. To begin with, the Hebrew word adam<\/span> (more correctly ’a–dha–m<\/span>) is not merely a proper name. Even in the Genesis story it is not used as a name until Genesis 4:25. The word is one of several Hebrew words meaning “man” and is the generic term for “human race.” In the vast majority of cases it refers either to a male individual (Lv 1:2; Jos 14:15; Neh 9:29; Is 56:2) or to humanity in general (Ex 4:11; Nm 12:3; 16:29; Dt 4:28; 1 Kgs 4:31; Jb 7:20; 14:1). The generic, collective sense of the word adam<\/span> is also behind the phrase “children (or sons) of men” (2 Sm 7:14; Pss 11:4; 12:1; 14:2; 53:2; 90:3; Eccl 1:13; 2:3). That phrase, literally “sons of adam<\/span>,”<\/em> simply means “men” or “human beings,” and when it is used the entire human race is in view. Indeed, the universalistic human connotation of the word adam<\/span> indicates a concern in the OT going far beyond Israel’s nationalistic hopes and its God—to all the earth’s people and the Lord of all nations (Gn 9:5-7; Dt 5:24; 8:3; 1 Kgs 8:38-39; Pss 8:4; 89:48; 107:8-31; Prv 12:14; Mi 6:8).<\/p>\nIt is no accident, then, that the first man was named “Adam” or “Man.” The name intimates that to speak about Adam is somehow also to speak about the entire human race. Such usage can perhaps best be understood through the ancient concept of corporate personality and representation familiar to the Hebrews and other Near Eastern peoples. Modern thinking emphasizes the individual; existence of the social group and all social relationships has been seen as secondary to, and dependent upon, the existence and desire of the individual. The Hebrew understanding was quite different. Though the separate personality of the individual was appreciated (Jer 31:29-30; Ez 18:4), there was a strong tendency to see the social group (family, tribe, nation) as a single organism with a corporate identity of its own. Likewise the group representative was seen as the embodiment or personification of the corporate personality of the group. Within the representative the essential qualities and characteristics of the social group resided in such a way that the actions and decisions of the representative were binding on the entire group. If the group was a family, the father was usually considered the corporate representative; for good or for ill his family, and sometimes his descendants, received the results of his actions (Gn 17:1-8; cf. Gn 20:1-9, 18; Ex 20:5-6; Jos 7:24-25; Rom 11:28; Heb 7:1-10).<\/p>\nAs the original man and father of humankind, in whose image all succeeding generations would be born (Gn 5:3), Adam was the corporate representative of humanity. The creation accounts themselves give the impression that the mandates of Genesis 1:26-30 (cf. Gn 9:1, 7; Pss 8:5-7; 104:14) as well as the curses of Genesis 3:16-19 (cf. Ps 90:3; Eccl 12:7; Is 13:8; 21:3) were meant not only for Adam (and Eve) but, through him, for the entire race.<\/p>\nIn Romans 5:12-21 the apostle Paul contrasted the death and condemnation brought upon humanity by Adam’s disobedience with the life and justification given to humanity through Christ’s obedience. More explicitly, in 1 Corinthians 15:45-50 (rsv<\/span>), Paul called Christ the “last Adam,” “second man,” and the “man of heaven” in juxtaposition to the “first Adam,” the “first man,” and the “man of dust.”<\/p>\nFor Paul, the human race was divided into two groups in the persons of Adam and Christ. Those who remain “incorporated” in Adam are the “old” humanity, bearing the image of the “man of dust” and partaking of his sin and alienation from God and Creation (Rom 5:12-19; 8:20-22). But those who are incorporated into Christ by faith become Christ’s “body” (Rom 12:4-5; 1 Cor 12:12-13, 27; Eph 1:22-23; Col 1:18); they are recreated in Christ’s image (Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 3:18); they become one “new man” (Eph 2:15; 4:24; Col 3:9-10, kjv<\/span>); and they partake of the new creation (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The old barriers raised by Adam are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16). For Paul, the functional similarity of Adam and Christ as representatives meant that Christ had restored what Adam had lost.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Eve; Man, Old and New; New Creation, New Creature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ADAM (Person<\/span>)<\/h3>\nFirst man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nThe creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the first humans were created male and female in God’s image with his specific mandate to populate and rule over the earth. With regard to the rest of creation the first humans were, on one hand, part of it, being created on the same day as other land animals; on the other hand, they were distinctly above it, being the culmination of the creation process and sole bearers of God’s image.<\/p>\nThe intent of the second account is much more specific (2:4–3:24); it seeks to explain the origin of the present human condition of sin and death and to set the stage for the drama of redemption. The story treats in detail aspects of Adam’s creation omitted from the first story. For example, it tells of the formation of Adam from the dust of the ground and of his receiving the breath of life from God (2:7). It recounts the planting of the Garden and the responsibility given to Adam to cultivate it (2:8-15). God’s instruction to Adam that the fruit of every tree in the Garden was his for food, except one, is carefully recorded, as well as the solemn warning that the fruit of the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” was never to be eaten, under the pain of death (2:16-17). Adam’s loneliness after naming the animals and not finding a suitable companion is also described, thus introducing the creation of the first woman (2:18-22). The creation of Eve from Adam’s rib poignantly portrays the essential unity of spirit and purpose of the sexes intended by God.<\/p>\nThe story does not end on such a positive note, however. It moves on to record the great deception Satan played upon Eve through the serpent. By clever insinuations and distortion of God’s original commandment (cf. 3:1 with 2:16-17), the serpent tricked Eve into eating the forbidden fruit and sharing it with Adam. Eve seems to have eaten because she was deceived (1 Tm 2:14), Adam out of a willful and conscious rebellion. Ironically, the two beings originally created in God’s image and likeness believed that they could become “like” God by disobeying him (Gn 3:5).<\/p>\nThe effects of their disobedience were immediate, though not at all what Adam had expected. For the first time a barrier of shame disrupted the unity of man and woman (3:7). More important, a barrier of real moral guilt was erected between the first couple and God. The story relates that when God came looking for Adam after his rebellion, he was hiding among the trees, already aware of his separation from God (3:8). When God questioned him, Adam threw the blame on Eve and, by implication, back on God: “It was the woman you gave me who brought me the fruit” (3:12, nlt<\/span>). Eve in turn blamed the serpent (3:13).<\/p>\nAccording to the story in Genesis, God held all three responsible and informed each one of the calamitous consequences of their rebellion (3:14-19). The two great mandates, originally signs of pure blessing, became mixed with curse and pain—the earth could now be populated only through the woman’s birth pangs and could be subdued only by the man’s labor and perspiration (3:16-18). Further, the unity of man and woman would be strained by man’s subjugation of her, or possibly by the beginning of a struggle for dominance between them (3:16b can be taken both ways). Finally, God pronounced the ultimate consequence: as he had originally warned, Adam and Eve were to die. Someday the breath of life would be taken from them, and their bodies would return to the dust from which they were made (3:19). That very day they also experienced a “spiritual” death; they were separated from God, the giver of life, and from the tree of life, the symbol of eternal life (3:22). God sent them out of Eden, and there was no way back. The entrance to paradise was blocked by the cherubim and flaming sword (3:23-24). Only God could restore what they had lost.<\/p>\nThe story is not devoid of hope. God was merciful even then. He made them garments of skin to cover their bodies and promised that someday the power of Satan behind the serpent would be crushed by the woman’s “seed” (Gn 3:15; cf. Rom 16:20). Many scholars consider that promise to be the first biblical mention of redemption.<\/p>\nThe Significance of Adam<\/p>\nAdam’s significance is based upon several assumptions, the first being that he was a historical individual. That assumption was made by many OT writers (Gn 4:25; 5:1-5; 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7). The NT writers agreed (Lk 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tm 2:13-14; Jude 1:14). Equally essential to Adam’s significance is a second assumption, that he was more than an individual. To begin with, the Hebrew word adam<\/span> (more correctly ’a–dha–m<\/span>) is not merely a proper name. Even in the Genesis story it is not used as a name until Genesis 4:25. The word is one of several Hebrew words meaning “man” and is the generic term for “human race.” In the vast majority of cases it refers either to a male individual (Lv 1:2; Jos 14:15; Neh 9:29; Is 56:2) or to humanity in general (Ex 4:11; Nm 12:3; 16:29; Dt 4:28; 1 Kgs 4:31; Jb 7:20; 14:1). The generic, collective sense of the word adam<\/span> is also behind the phrase “children (or sons) of men” (2 Sm 7:14; Pss 11:4; 12:1; 14:2; 53:2; 90:3; Eccl 1:13; 2:3). That phrase, literally “sons of adam<\/span>,”<\/em> simply means “men” or “human beings,” and when it is used the entire human race is in view. Indeed, the universalistic human connotation of the word adam<\/span> indicates a concern in the OT going far beyond Israel’s nationalistic hopes and its God—to all the earth’s people and the Lord of all nations (Gn 9:5-7; Dt 5:24; 8:3; 1 Kgs 8:38-39; Pss 8:4; 89:48; 107:8-31; Prv 12:14; Mi 6:8).<\/p>\nIt is no accident, then, that the first man was named “Adam” or “Man.” The name intimates that to speak about Adam is somehow also to speak about the entire human race. Such usage can perhaps best be understood through the ancient concept of corporate personality and representation familiar to the Hebrews and other Near Eastern peoples. Modern thinking emphasizes the individual; existence of the social group and all social relationships has been seen as secondary to, and dependent upon, the existence and desire of the individual. The Hebrew understanding was quite different. Though the separate personality of the individual was appreciated (Jer 31:29-30; Ez 18:4), there was a strong tendency to see the social group (family, tribe, nation) as a single organism with a corporate identity of its own. Likewise the group representative was seen as the embodiment or personification of the corporate personality of the group. Within the representative the essential qualities and characteristics of the social group resided in such a way that the actions and decisions of the representative were binding on the entire group. If the group was a family, the father was usually considered the corporate representative; for good or for ill his family, and sometimes his descendants, received the results of his actions (Gn 17:1-8; cf. Gn 20:1-9, 18; Ex 20:5-6; Jos 7:24-25; Rom 11:28; Heb 7:1-10).<\/p>\nAs the original man and father of humankind, in whose image all succeeding generations would be born (Gn 5:3), Adam was the corporate representative of humanity. The creation accounts themselves give the impression that the mandates of Genesis 1:26-30 (cf. Gn 9:1, 7; Pss 8:5-7; 104:14) as well as the curses of Genesis 3:16-19 (cf. Ps 90:3; Eccl 12:7; Is 13:8; 21:3) were meant not only for Adam (and Eve) but, through him, for the entire race.<\/p>\nIn Romans 5:12-21 the apostle Paul contrasted the death and condemnation brought upon humanity by Adam’s disobedience with the life and justification given to humanity through Christ’s obedience. More explicitly, in 1 Corinthians 15:45-50 (rsv<\/span>), Paul called Christ the “last Adam,” “second man,” and the “man of heaven” in juxtaposition to the “first Adam,” the “first man,” and the “man of dust.”<\/p>\nFor Paul, the human race was divided into two groups in the persons of Adam and Christ. Those who remain “incorporated” in Adam are the “old” humanity, bearing the image of the “man of dust” and partaking of his sin and alienation from God and Creation (Rom 5:12-19; 8:20-22). But those who are incorporated into Christ by faith become Christ’s “body” (Rom 12:4-5; 1 Cor 12:12-13, 27; Eph 1:22-23; Col 1:18); they are recreated in Christ’s image (Rom 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; 2 Cor 3:18); they become one “new man” (Eph 2:15; 4:24; Col 3:9-10, kjv<\/span>); and they partake of the new creation (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). The old barriers raised by Adam are removed by Christ (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:27-28; Eph 2:14-16). For Paul, the functional similarity of Adam and Christ as representatives meant that Christ had restored what Adam had lost.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Eve; Man, Old and New; New Creation, New Creature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ADAM (Person) First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ. The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the f...","summary_en":"ADAM (Person) First man and father of the human race. Adam’s role in biblical history is important not only in OT considerations but also in understanding the meaning of salvation and the person and work of Jesus Christ. The creation of Adam and the first woman, Eve, is recited in two accounts in the book of Genesis. The intent of the first account (1:26-31) is to present the first pair in their relationship to God and to the rest of the created order. It teaches that with regard to God the f...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8102,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","title_en":"Law and Punishment*, Criminal","content_ro":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\nThe science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n• Punishment<\/p>\n• Conclusion<\/p>\nNear Eastern Context<\/p>\nIn ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\nConclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\nHebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\nSince Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\nIn the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\nThe idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\nAny type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\nMurder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\nIn the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\nKidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\nThe book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\nInjuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\nNegligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\nIn ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\nAdultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\nIn a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\nIf a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\nLittle emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\nThe Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\nA number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\nSome Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\nSorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\nIn Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\nPunishment<\/p>\nNear Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\nMany forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\nBefore a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\nIn offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\nThe Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\nCitizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\nThe Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\nCapital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\nUsually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 BC<\/span> and AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\nThree types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\nConclusion<\/p>\nHebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\nThe Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT*<\/h3>\nThe science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, “crimes” included all punishable offenses, even religious offenses such as idolatry (worshiping a false god) or blasphemy (speaking or behaving with contempt toward God).<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Near Eastern Context<\/p>\n• Hebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n• Punishment<\/p>\n• Conclusion<\/p>\nNear Eastern Context<\/p>\nIn ancient societies as in modern ones, laws were considered necessary to regulate individual behavior for the good of the community, state, or nation. Today laws are thought of as made by people for their own protection. In contrast, all ancient Near Eastern law codes were considered to have come directly from some divine source. Hebrew law, though distinct, followed the general pattern of Near Eastern law codes, as is known from those that have survived—such as the Code of Hammurabi and Assyrian and Hittite laws.<\/p>\nConclusions about the “origin” of ancient laws should be made cautiously. Although evidence indicates that Hammurabi based his legislation partially on earlier Sumerian codes, he declared that his code had been received from Shamash, god of justice. That declaration must have been intended to convey primarily that his code had the express sanction of Shamash, since at least some people would recognize it as a compilation based largely on earlier laws. Similarly, the clear biblical statements about Moses receiving the law on Mt Sinai (Ex 19–24) do not rule out the possibility that parts of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) may have existed in earlier codes. Possibly the Mosaic legislation included some social rules adapted from the period of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.<\/p>\nHebrew Criminal Law<\/p>\n<h5>Laws Governing Offenses against God<\/h5>\nSince Hebrew law was designed for a group of people for whom religion was of paramount importance and whose faith was endangered by the influence of the beliefs of their pagan neighbors, it is not surprising that so much of Hebrew law dealt with crimes committed against God. The prohibition against worshiping idols is stated and repeated in the Torah, or Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible): “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex 20:4-5, rsv<\/span>). Sacrifice of infants, practiced in some pagan religions, was specifically prohibited in Israel. The penalty for that crime, as for the other forms of murder, was stoning to death (Lv 20:2).<\/p>\nIn the book of Leviticus, death by stoning was recorded as the appropriate punishment for blaspheming the name of God (Lv 24:11-16). False prophecy was also a criminal offense; that accusation could apply to a person making a prediction in the name of a god other than the Lord, or implying falsely that one’s prophecy resulted from a communication with God. Jeremiah, whose prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar’s victory over the southern kingdom of Judah was for a time considered to be false, was almost lynched by a mob (Jer 26:8-9).<\/p>\nThe idea of keeping the seventh day holy stemmed from the celebration of God’s work in creating the universe in six days and resting on the seventh. Keeping the Sabbath required cessation of manual work for the entire family, including farm animals (Ex 16:23; 20:8-11). People were also required to meet together on the Sabbath for worship, which at a later period in Hebrew history included the reading of Scripture, prayer, and preaching. Anyone breaking the Sabbath could be sentenced to death, as happened to a man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\nAny type of premeditated crime was considered an offense against God, the giver of all law; hence, it was punishable by death (Nm 15:30-31). Hebrew law also insisted on donation of the firstfruits of harvest to the Lord without delay. That requirement was sometimes carried over to include a first child, whose life was dedicated to service in the temple (Ex 22:29-30; Dt 15:19).<\/p>\n<h5>Personal Injury<\/h5>\nMurder, an offense against “God’s image,” was one of many crimes punishable by death in OT times. The book of Exodus stated unequivocally that “anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death” (Ex 21:12, nlt<\/span>). A murderer who killed by using a weapon such as a stone, a piece of wood, or iron could be killed in revenge by a relative of the deceased. If the original death happened accidentally, the community would sometimes help to conceal the killer and encourage him to hide in a nearby city of refuge, where he would be safe as long as he remained within its gates. He had to stay in that sanctuary until the death of the high priest then in office, after which he was free to return to his own city (Nm 35:10-28). The sixth commandment enjoined, “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13). The Hebrew word referred specifically to murder, not to all forms of killing. Killing an enemy in battle and the execution of a murderer were considered necessary and were not prohibited. More than one witness was required for any conviction, particularly in a murder case (Nm 35:30; Dt 17:6; 19:15).<\/p>\nIn the Code of Hammurabi a man responsible for an accidental injury to another was required to pay for the services of the physician. If the victim died, a fine was payable according to the victim’s rank. In a sense the Hebrews went further by requiring payment for any loss of time suffered by the injured person (Ex 21:18-19).<\/p>\nKidnapping was punishable by death in the OT. Exodus states that “Kidnappers must be killed, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves” (Ex 21:16, nlt<\/span>). Joseph’s being sold into slavery by his brothers illustrates this kind of kidnapping.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws concerning Property<\/h5>\nThe book of Exodus is quite specific about anyone responsible for damage to the property or crops of another. If a field caught fire and the fire spread, damaging crops in other fields, the person who started the fire, or perhaps the owner of the first field to catch fire, was responsible for the damage (Ex 22:6). Hammurabi’s code cited a similar instance of a man who neglected to keep a dike in repair and was therefore responsible for flood damage to his neighbor’s crops.<\/p>\nInjuries to animals, especially oxen, or injuries to people or property caused by such animals formed an important area of Hebrew law. If an ox that had been previously good-tempered killed a man, the owner would be blameless, although the ox would be put to death—a severe financial penalty for the owner. If an ox with a history of goring killed a man because its owner failed to restrain it adequately, both ox and owner would be put to death. The owner’s life could be ransomed by payment of an agreed-upon sum. If the person an ox gored was a servant, the ox was stoned and the owner paid a fine (Ex 21:28-32). The Code of Hammurabi also recommended no punishment for a first offense by an animal, but if the owner knew that the ox was dangerous and had taken no steps to prevent harm, a fine in silver was payable—a very large fine for an upper-class victim, slightly less if the victim was a slave. However bad the circumstances and however vicious the ox, the Code of Hammurabi stopped at a fine for the offense, never imposing a death penalty on either the animal or the owner.<\/p>\nNegligence causing injury to an animal was also punished in Hebrew law. If an ox or a donkey fell into a pit carelessly left uncovered, the owner of the animal was reimbursed for its loss (Ex 21:33-36).<\/p>\nIn ancient cultures women were generally considered chattel (personal property), much like animals or slaves. A daughter was considered to be her father’s property until her marriage, then the property of her husband. Therefore, any offense against a married woman was regarded as an offense against the property of the husband. According to the Code of Hammurabi, a child could be sold into slavery as a servant or bondsman, usually in payment of the father’s debt (cf. Ex 21:2-7; Neh 5:5-8; Is 50:1). Parental authority was so highly regarded in biblical law that a stubborn and rebellious son could be brought before the elders on the grounds of being disobedient and a glutton or a drunkard. He might then be convicted and stoned to death on the spot by the men of the city (Dt 21:18-21). Even that, however, was a protection of the child’s rights; some Near Eastern legislation allowed a parent to order the death of his offspring without reference to the elders or to anyone else. With daughters in particular being held in such low esteem, it is perhaps remarkable that a daughter could inherit property if there were no sons (Nm 27:8).<\/p>\nAdultery, prohibited in the Decalogue, was another crime against a man’s property, specifically his wife. The book of Deuteronomy goes into considerable detail about cases of adultery—the punishment for both persons being death (Dt 22:22). If a man seduced a young woman who was not betrothed, he was required to pay her father the bride price (50 silver shekels); he could not divorce her but had to keep her as his wife for the rest of his life (Ex 22:16; Dt 22:28-29).<\/p>\nIn a situation where a wife was accused of adultery but without evidence, a trial was conducted. The husband would bring his wife to a priest and present a small offering (a tenth of a measure of barley meal, with neither oil nor frankincense on it), indicating the low esteem in which he now held his wife. The woman then stood before the Lord holding an earthen jar of “holy water.” Dust from the floor of the tabernacle was mixed with the water, and the cereal offering was placed in her hands. Her hair was loosened by the priest to show not only her grief but also to give an impression of abandonment. She was then required to take an oath. After that, the priest pronounced a curse upon her to the effect that her womb would be fertilized easily, but that she would have many miscarriages. She had to give her consent to that pronouncement. The priest then wrote the curses in a book and symbolically washed them off into the “bitter water.” The woman was required to drink the water while the priest waved the cereal offering from her hands before the Lord and burned some of it on the altar. The priest told her that if she was guilty, the water would make her thigh rot and her abdomen swell. If that happened, she would become an outcast; but if she were proved innocent, she would be free. Whatever the result, no blame for false accusation fell upon the husband (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\nIf a slave was struck by his master in such a manner as to cause instant death, the slave’s death had to be avenged. If the slave lingered, possibly for days, he did not need to be avenged, his loss being a sufficient punishment for the owner (Ex 21:20-21). It is unlikely that the Hebrews had much experience with that law, which had no parallels in Hammurabi’s code. If an owner injured his slave by causing the loss of an eye or a tooth, Hebrew law required that the slave be set free (vv 26-27). The Code of Hammurabi gave an example of a man injuring another man’s slave; the owner had to be paid half the slave’s value.<\/p>\nLittle emphasis was placed on burglary or larceny in the Hebrew law code. A burglar was presumed to be repentant and ready to make restitution. After return of the stolen property and payment of a small additional fine, a thief could again “approach the Lord” (Lv 6:2-7). By contrast, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed the death penalty for burglary. In Hebrew law, theft of an animal required restitution to be made in the ratio of at least two to one; if a bull or a cow had been stolen or sold, the thief had to restore the property fivefold. The Code of Hammurabi contained a similar statute: “If a man steal ox or sheep, ass or pig, or goat—if it be from a god or a palace, he shall restore thirtyfold; if it be from a freeman, he shall render tenfold. If the thief have nothing wherewith to pay, he shall be put to death.” In Hebrew law goods stolen from a home were simply to be restored without additional penalty. If the thief no longer had the goods and was unable to pay the equivalent value, he might be sold into slavery until restitution was made (Ex 22:1-4).<\/p>\n<h5>General Laws<\/h5>\nThe Hebrew code as contained in Exodus and Deuteronomy included many general prohibitions. Some concerned business dealings such as the removal of boundary markers (Dt 19:14). The use of false weights and measures was condemned (Lv 19:35; Dt 25:15; Prv 11:1; 20:23; Mi 6:11). Bribery was strictly forbidden (Ex 23:8), yet no punishment was specified for those who broke that law. In the Code of Hammurabi, if a judge changed his decision and was unable to give a satisfactory explanation, particularly if bribery was suspected, the judge had to pay 12 times the amount of the penalty and lost his seat on the bench. In the Hebrew code, perjury was also dealt with, although again no punishment was specified. The Code of Hammurabi stated that for perjury in cases where the punishment was death, persons giving false testimony were to be sentenced to death themselves (cf. Ex 23:1).<\/p>\nA number of Hebrew laws reflected concern for the poor. For example, poor people were not to be subjected to usury if they were in debt, or left cold at night if their coats were taken as a pledge. Widows, orphans, and strangers were also to be treated with mercy and understanding (Ex 22:21-27; 23:9; Dt 23:19; 24:17).<\/p>\nSome Hebrew laws concerned family behavior, such as those previously mentioned who cursed or disobeyed their parents (Ex 21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 27:16; cf. Prv 20:20; 30:17). Family responsibilities were strong; an entire family frequently suffered punishment for the crime of one of its individual members (Jos 7:20-26; 2 Sm 3:29; 21:1-9; 2 Kgs 5:27; Lam 5:7). Over a period of time, as individual responsibility came to be recognized, parents were no longer put to death for the crimes of their children, or vice versa (cf. Jer 31:29-30).<\/p>\nSorcery and witchcraft were forbidden. The book of Exodus stated explicitly, “A sorceress must not be allowed to live” (22:18, nlt<\/span>). Sexual perversions, such as intercourse with animals, were forbidden under penalty of death. Regulations prohibiting marriage with close relatives were given in detail (Lv 20:17-21).<\/p>\nIn Hebrew law no parallel existed for some interesting items in the Code of Hammurabi concerning surgery. That code mentioned veterinary surgery and even operations on the human eye. A Babylonian surgeon had to be wary, for “if a physician makes a deep incision upon a man with his bronze lancet and causes the man’s death or operates on the eye socket of a man with his bronze lancet and destroys the man’s eye, then they shall cut off his hand.” Surgery was virtually unknown among the ancient Israelites except for the ritual practice of circumcision.<\/p>\nPunishment<\/p>\nNear Eastern punishments for murder and personal injury were retaliatory and often of the same nature as the offense. Other methods of punishment tended to vary with individual countries or traditions. Many kinds of punishment were inflicted on people defeated in both a full-scale war or a small insurrection.<\/p>\n<h5>Physical Punishment<\/h5>\nMany forms of punishment stopped short of killing but could nevertheless be quite severe.<\/p>\n1. In the OT beating with rods or switches was the traditional form of discipline for children, fools, and slaves (Ex 21:20; Prv 13:24; 26:3). Scourging (also called flogging) was more severe than beating. The whip employed could be made of several strips of leather fastened at one end or of two interwoven leather strips. A whip nicknamed “scorpion” (because of the barbs in its end) was one of the cruelest instruments of punishment mentioned in the OT (1 Kgs 12:11, 14). The severity of punishment could be increased by inserting pieces of metal or bone into the leather.<\/p>\nBefore a scourging, the victim would be examined for physical fitness. If death resulted from the blows, no blame was attached to the person administering the punishment. The victim was stripped to the waist and tied to a pillar, his hands bound with leather thongs. The severity of a scourging depended on the crime, although the Mosaic law set an upper limit of 40 lashes (Dt 25:1-3). To guard against a miscount, that number was later lowered by one (2 Cor 11:24). Lashes might be administered both on the chest and the back. Under some law codes, scourging could be used as a private punishment; in that case, if the victim died, another life was forfeit.<\/p>\nIn offenses against the law, synagogue authorities administered scourgings (Mt 10:17). A husband might be scourged by the elders of the city for defamation of his wife’s character (Dt 22:18). Scourging was also used as a means of interrogating a prisoner—hence, a Roman captain’s comment that the apostle Paul should be “examined by scourging” (Acts 22:24).<\/p>\nThe Romans usually reserved scourging for non-Roman citizens, such as slaves or aliens, as well as for those condemned to death. Normally, criminals were scourged after they had been condemned to death; it is therefore unusual to find the scourging of Jesus taking place before his condemnation. Pilate may have hoped to soften the people’s hearts by Jesus’ suffering so that they would not demand the death penalty (Lk 23:16, 22; Jn 19:1).<\/p>\nCitizens of the Roman Empire could never be beaten or scourged before sentencing (Acts 22:25). Hence, the magistrates were afraid when they heard that Paul, a Roman citizen, had been beaten under those circumstances (16:37-39).<\/p>\n<li>2. The gouging out of the eyes of prisoners and captives was a common practice in the Near East. The Philistines blinded Samson before imprisoning him (Jgs 16:21). The Babylonians did the same to King Zedekiah in 587 BC<\/span> before taking him into captivity (2 Kgs 25:7). The Ammonite king Nahash was prepared to accept peace overtures from the men of the city of Jabesh on condition that all their right eyes be gouged out. Nahash’s purpose was to disgrace them and prevent them from further active participation in warfare (1 Sm 11:1-4).<\/li>\n<li>3. Several forms of mutilation served as punishments in the Near East. The Israelites considered their own bodies sacred and made in God’s image, but that did not prevent them from mutilating their enemies by cutting off their thumbs and large toes.<\/li>\nThe Code of Hammurabi and the Assyrian law code prescribed mutilation of the eye, nose, ear, breast, tongue, lip, hand, and finger as punishments for specific crimes. In Assyria, punishment was often inflicted by the victim of the crime under supervision of court officials. The Code of Hammurabi also contained safeguards so that criminals were not punished in excess of the law’s sentence.<\/p>\n<li>4. Stocks are mentioned as a form of punishment in the later OT period. The prophets Hanani (2 Chr 16:10) and Jeremiah (Jer 20:2-3) suffered the indignity of being placed in stocks. Both ankles, and sometimes the wrists and head as well, were placed in holes in two large pieces of wood. In Roman times, stocks were converted to a form of torture, with a prisoner’s legs stretched to holes increasingly far apart. In the NT, Paul and Silas had their feet placed in stocks by a Philippian jailer (Acts 16:24). The same Greek word, meaning “confinement,” can refer to fetters chaining a prisoner or to an iron collar like that worn by runaway Roman slaves.<\/li>\n<h5>Capital Punishment<\/h5>\nCapital punishment was common in many Near Eastern countries. Several methods were used.<\/p>\n1. Those who offended a king were beheaded with a sword (2 Sm 16:9; 2 Kgs 6:31-32), as were idolaters and murderers (according to the Mishnah, the Jewish commentary on the law). The sword was probably used for private executions as well. Inhabitants of entire cities were sometimes “put to the sword” for their denial of the faith (Ex 32:27; Dt 13:15).<\/p>\n<li>2. Certain sexual offenses were punished with death by burning (Lv 20:14; 21:9). Tamar, Judah’s daughter-in-law, was accused of adultery and ordered to be burned to death outside the city (Gn 38:24). The Lord instructed that anyone whose feet touched the holy ground of Mt Sinai was to be shot with arrows or stoned (Ex 19:13).<\/li>\n<li>3. Hanging may have been a form of execution in biblical times. But many scholars think the word translated “hanging” or “hanging on a tree” actually meant impalement (Nm 25:4; Dt 21:22-23; Jos 8:29; 2 Sm 21:6, 9; Est 9:14). A spiked wooden stake was set in the ground and the victim’s body was forced onto the spike, the tip of which probably protruded from the chest or mouth. Commonly practiced by the Assyrians, that form of execution was reserved for those guilty of the worst crimes and for prisoners of war or deserters. The Persian king Darius is reputed to have impaled 3,000 men when his army entered Babylon. Impalement was the penalty Darius set for changing his edict concerning the rebuilding of the temple (Ezr 6:11-12). It is not certain whether Haman was hung or impaled (see Est 7:9-10, nlt<\/span> and mg notes).<\/li>\nUsually “hanging” was a means of exhibiting a corpse as a warning to local inhabitants (Gn 40:19; Jos 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sm 4:12). Corpses were exhibited for only one day and were buried before nightfall. The hanging corpse was considered a defilement of the land that God had given (Dt 21:22-23). According to the Mishnah, the hands were tied together and the body hanged from the arm of a wooden gallows.<\/p>\n<li>4. Crucifixion was a punishment employed by the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167–166 BC<\/span>; according to Josephus, a first-century AD<\/span> Jewish historian, Jews who refused to give up their traditional faith were so executed. During the Maccabean period (167–40 BC<\/span>), Alexander Janneus crucified 800 rebellious Pharisees in an attempt to reestablish his authority. Crucifixion was a widespread form of execution: it was used in most places in the Roman Empire, including India, North Africa, and Germany. Between 4 BC<\/span> and AD<\/span> 70, on some occasions the number of people crucified at one time reached into the thousands.<\/li>\nThree types of crosses seem to have been used: a cross with the crossbar below the head of the upright bar (Latin cross); a T-shaped cross (St Anthony’s cross); and an X-shaped cross (St Andrew’s cross). Matthew records that an inscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” was placed over Jesus’ head (Mt 27:37). That indicates that for Jesus’ crucifixion a Latin cross was used, as artists have traditionally depicted it. In crucifixions the victim was most likely affixed to the cross while it was still lying flat on the ground. Then the cross was raised into position and dropped into a hole. The hands were either nailed or bound to the cross; it is uncertain whether the feet were nailed with one or two nails. The weight of the body was supported by a piece of wood at the feet and possibly by another that was like a spike between the legs.<\/p>\n<li>5. Stoning was the most common Hebrew death penalty. The first stones were thrown by the prosecution witnesses, who were then joined by spectators. Stoning was the punishment for certain religious offenses (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:32-36; Dt 13:1-10; 17:2-5), adultery (Dt 22:23-24), child sacrifice (Lv 20:2), divination of spirits (Lv 20:27), and rebellion (Dt 21:18-21). Before his conversion, the apostle Paul witnessed and consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-59). Paul himself later survived a stoning at Lystra (14:19). In Roman times, a person would occasionally be stoned as he stood on a gallows.<\/li>\nConclusion<\/p>\nHebrew law was part of the Torah (“instruction”) given by God to make his covenant people holy. At that time the Israelites were a seminomadic band of former slaves. Although there are similarities with the Code of Hammurabi and other laws of settled Near Eastern cultures, there are also many differences. Hebrew law often had a broader view, even in its less sophisticated cultural setting, as though its purpose was more to teach godly behavior than to stabilize society. The simplicity and directness of the Ten Commandments, in particular, continue to influence jurisprudence, even in modern secular society.<\/p>\nThe Bible’s primary message is God’s love for his covenant people, yet it never overlooks the harsh realities of life in a fallen world. Human beings sin and they commit crimes; they suffer estrangement from God because of their sin and are punished for their crimes. Christians are constantly reminded of the realism of God’s love by the cross as the symbol of Christian faith. They see the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of OT prophecy that the Lord put our iniquity on him (Is 53:5-6). The NT conviction is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Courts and Trials; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","summary_en":"CRIMINAL LAW AND PUNISHMENT* The science or philosophy of law is called jurisprudence. Although modern jurisprudence bears little resemblance to biblical concepts of law, the Scriptures have played a definite role in its development. Today, criminal law is clearly distinguished from civil law; in Bible times the distinction was much less clear. Today, offenses against civil law (torts) are distinguished from minor crimes (misdemeanors) as well as from serious crimes (felonies). In the Bible, ...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31832,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Proverbs","title_en":"Book of Proverbs","content_ro":"<h3>PROVERBS, Book of<\/span><\/h3>\nThird poetical book in the OT. A collection of striking, epigrammatic expressions concerning practical wisdom by example, warning, or precept.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Authors<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthors<\/p>\nWhile there is an underlying unity of thought in the book of Proverbs, there is no presumption of unity of authorship, since the writers of the seven or more sections into which the book is divided are, in most cases, clearly noted.<\/p>\n<h5>1:1–9:18<\/h5>\nThere is a division of opinion as to whether the opening verse refers to the Solomonic authorship of this section or whether it simply underscores the name of the main contributor to the entire book. It is objected that the man who wrote so carefully about the danger of promiscuous relationships with immoral women—one of the main themes of this section—is not likely to be Solomon, who failed significantly in the matter of mixed marriages (1 Kgs 11:1-8). There are flaws in such an argument. One may be capable of giving excellent advice without necessarily having the strength of character to follow it oneself, and there is a distinction between the seductive prostitutes or adulteresses of Proverbs 5:1-21, 6:20-35, 7:1-27 and Solomon’s polygamous but respectable relationships. However, the question of authorship is probably best left open. Those who question the Solomonic origin of this section regard 1:2-7 as setting out the purpose of the whole book. Proverbs 1:8–9:18 is a series of 13 practical discourses on wisdom, lovingly and honestly given as by a father to a son. This provides an indispensable foundation for the more popular proverbial teaching in the remainder of the book.<\/p>\n<h5>10:1–22:16<\/h5>\nSolomon is specifically noted as the author or compiler of this main section of Proverbs. The probability that he played a major part in the production of the book of Proverbs finds strong support in the historical books. Soon after his coronation he was endowed with the spirit of wisdom—in response to his request (1 Kgs 3:5-14). The incident concerning the two prostitutes (vv 16-28) provided public proof of this. His universal reputation, especially in connection with proverbial wisdom, is attested to in 1 Kings 4:29-34 and in the visit of the queen of Sheba (10:1-13).<\/p>\n<h5>22:17–24:34<\/h5>\nThe title “the words of the wise” (Prv 22:17, neb<\/span>) is incorporated into the opening verse of this section. An evident difference of style, replacing the simple, one-verse proverb by a more discursive approach that deals with a subject over several verses, and the title of the next subsection “These also are sayings of the wise” (24:23), strongly suggest the independence of this collection. Of major interest is the remarkably close parallel between 22:17–23:11 and the Egyptian book of Amenemope, which has been dated variously between the 13th and 7th centuries BC<\/span>. Scholars have detected as many as 30 connections between the two. Most think that this section in Proverbs is an adaptation of an Egyptian original (such selection and modification being entirely congruous with the doctrine of inspiration). However, a minority of scholars, including several prominent Egyptologists, argue persuasively on the basis of grammatical structure that Amenemope is derived from a Hebrew original.<\/p>\n<h5>25:1–29:27<\/h5>\nSome material of Solomon’s has here been edited and incorporated by “the men of Hezekiah king of Judah” (25:1). In this section there is a tendency to group together proverbs dealing with specific subjects—for example, the relationship between a king and his subjects (vv 2-7), the lazy man (26:13-16), and the mischief maker (vv 17-27). Solomon and Hezekiah were frequently linked together in Jewish thought (e.g., 2 Chr 30:26), and rabbinic tradition credited Hezekiah with the production of both Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. The national prestige during the reigns of both kings would have been conducive to literary pursuits.<\/p>\n<h5>30:1-33<\/h5>\nNothing is known of Agur, of his father, Jakeh of Massa, or of the two other characters mentioned, Ithiel and Ucal. According to Genesis 25:14, Massa was one of the 12 sons of Ishmael, and it is likely that Agur came from north Arabia, an area traditionally renowned for its wisdom.<\/p>\n<h5>31:1-9<\/h5>\nLemuel, the author of this section, also came from Massa, but apart from this is unknown. The inclusion of wisdom sayings from sources outside Israel illustrates the international connections of the wisdom movement during the period of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<h5>31:10-31<\/h5>\nIt is possible that Lemuel’s authorship includes this superb acrostic poem on the ideal wife; its inspiration may have come from his mother, like the earlier section. But the pattern of life would fit more easily into the context of a prosperous, agricultural community in Palestine rather than in an Arabian nomadic or seminomadic community. For this reason, most scholars regard the poem as anonymous.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nThe larger part of the book may, with confidence, be ascribed to Solomon (ruled c. 970–930 BC<\/span>). But the considerable contribution of Hezekiah and his men rules out a date for the completion of the book before 700 BC<\/span>. The inclusion of sections by non-Israelites, like Agur and Lemuel, is more likely in the preexilic period, with its wider international interests, than in the more particularistic atmosphere of postexilic Judaism. Probably the final, sophisticated acrostic poem was the last section to be included, but there is nothing in the book that demands a date later than the early seventh century BC<\/span>. In rabbinic tradition Proverbs was invariably grouped with Psalms and Job in the third section of the Jewish canon, the Writings or Holy Books. While the content of the Writings was not authoritatively finalized until the end of the first century AD<\/span>, it is likely that Proverbs was accepted as inspired long before this, as witnessed by its inclusion in the Septuagint, the principal Greek translation. The order in our English versions may have been influenced by the rabbinic tradition that linked the books of Job, Psalms, and Proverbs with Moses, David, and Hezekiah, respectively.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThe book of Proverbs is included in the OT corpus of books known as the Wisdom Literature. This corpus is further represented in Scripture by the books of Job and Ecclesiastes and some of the Psalms (e.g., Pss 1, 37, 73, 119). Proverbs represents one major class of this literature. Individual proverbs contain sharp, practical applications of wisdom covering many facets of life. Job and Ecclesiastes focus on one major problem, or a group of interrelated problems, in monologue or dialogue form.<\/p>\nIn the ancient Near East, wisdom was originally connected with all skills, manual as well as intellectual, and was considered to be the gift of the gods. Gradually it acquired a dominantly intellectual significance, particularly in a cultic setting, in such magical or semimagical arts as exorcism. A wide range of wisdom literature from Egypt, Canaan, and Mesopotamia, of the two basic types noted in the preceding paragraph, has survived, making it possible to see its Hebrew counterpart against this background. There is no duplication, however, and the spirit of the Hebrew Wisdom Literature is markedly superior to anything comparable in the ancient world. This is due principally to the strong religious foundation in Israel, where wisdom’s first step was to trust and revere the Lord (Prv 1:7).<\/p>\nWhen Israel emerged as a nation in the Mosaic period, it was in a world where individuals or groups of “the wise” already existed. Israel shared this inheritance, with both men and women being involved, as witnessed by the wise women of Tekoa and Abel in Beth-maacah (2 Sm 14:2; 20:16) and the professional military or civic court counselors Ahithophel and Hushai (2 Sm 15:1-2, 31; 16:15-19). Proverbs shows this group of “the wise” at its best; the life of uprightness, diligence, honesty, and self-control that it advocates sets a standard of morality that accords with the law on which it was based. But it is probable that many proverbs predate the emergence of a class of the wise. Most communities develop their own collections of short, witty sayings that express practical wisdom and form a store of primitive philosophy. Solomon’s part in giving definitive shape to Israel’s proverbs (1 Kgs 4:32) has already been noted. The antithetic form of Hebrew poetry, where the parallelism of the second line allows either a sharp contrast (as generally in Proverbs 10–15) or further support (i.e., synonymous parallelism, as in chs 16–22) is an ideal medium for the proverb. When the class of “the wise” developed, this popular wisdom became part of their provenance.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theology<\/p>\n<h5>The Close Relationship between Religion and Everyday Life<\/h5>\nWhile the general tone of Proverbs is dominantly rational, the importance of fearing (showing reverence to) the Lord is stressed throughout the book (1:7; 2:5; 3:7; 8:13; etc.). This “fear of the Lord” is one of the main definitions of religion in the OT, the other being “the knowledge of God” stressed especially by Hosea and Jeremiah (Jer 9:24; Hos 4:1). Both are found in parallel in Proverbs 2:5 and 9:10. Far from there being an unbridgeable gap between religion and the secular world, Proverbs shows the results, in noble character and harmonious, happy homes, when the whole of life is brought under God’s control. A danger exists when the moral elements are taken in isolation from the religious foundation that is assumed throughout. Then the pursuit for happiness or success can become selfish, inward-looking, and ultimately self-defeating.<\/p>\n<h5>Proverbs and the Prophetic Movement<\/h5>\nThere are many similarities between Proverbs and the Prophets, including a down-to-earth realism; a championing of the poor and underprivileged groups (e.g., 14:31); a realization of the inefficacy of sacrifice apart from morality (15:8; 21:27); and an emphasis on the individual, which was sometimes overlooked because of the strong sense of corporate identity within the covenant community. Jeremiah and Ezekiel, especially, restated strongly the theme of individual responsibility (Jer 31:29-30; Ez 18). But there is a vital difference that Proverbs shares with the remainder of biblical Wisdom Literature, namely, the absence of any clear, historical reference to Israel’s election and covenant relationship with God. This was the consistent point of appeal of the great preexilic prophets. Similarly, Jerusalem and its temple theology are not mentioned, although the wisdom movement, especially as reflected in Proverbs, flourished under the patronage of the Davidic monarchy. Even the name Israel does not occur. This has lent strength to the view that Proverbs is the clearest and most comprehensive manual of universal, practical ethics existing in the ancient world. An educated contemporary Egyptian would have found Proverbs readily comprehensible and uplifting, and although this was not its primary purpose, the book still has a strong appeal to the moral non-Christian.<\/p>\n<h5>Proverbs and Deuteronomy<\/h5>\nProverbs shares many features with the book of Deuteronomy, especially its emphasis on retribution and reward (Prv 2:22; 3:9-10; 10:27-30; cf. Dt 28). This doctrine could be perverted into an invariable equation: the righteous are always rewarded and the wicked are always punished. That is a view against which Job (Jb 21:7-34) and Jeremiah (Jer 12:1-4) protested strongly. It could also result in a hypocritical, self-seeking approach; I want the blessings promised (e.g., Prv 3:9-10), therefore I will “honor” God in the matter of tithes. This substitution of an outward show for the inward dynamic of love, gratitude, and faith was often the curse of Israel’s formalized religion. However, the principle itself—that those who honor God and live in cooperation with him and his laws are generally those who are God-blessed (not necessarily in material terms)—is a scriptural one, and the authors of Proverbs must not be blamed for the perversions that arose subsequently.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\n<h5>Introduction: 1:1-7<\/h5>\nProverbs 1:1-7 sets out the purpose of the wisdom movement in Israel. The subtitle of the whole book is found in verse 2: “The purpose of these proverbs is to teach people wisdom and discipline, and to help them understand wise sayings” (nlt<\/span>). The question of the authorship of this section has already been discussed, but there is certainly nothing incongruous about Solomon’s authorship. In the earlier part of his reign, Solomon showed a deep longing for the wisdom that was required to govern his people rightly (1 Kgs 3:7-9), and there is the earnest desire here that his subjects might have a similar understanding. Verses 1-6 form one sentence in Hebrew and include no fewer than 11 different aspects of wisdom. The first of them, “wisdom,” occurs 37 times in Proverbs and indicates an informed, skillful use of knowledge. It is only by taking the first step of trusting in the Lord that a person can enter into wisdom. Morality is not situational, nor an absolute in itself; it requires an unchanging point of reference that can only be found in God.<\/p>\n<h5>Lessons on Wisdom: 1:8–9:18<\/h5>\nThis section is composed of 13 distinct lessons on wisdom, most of which are introduced by “My son” or something similar. The final lesson (8:1–9:18) is given by Wisdom herself. This method indicates the warm, personal relationship between the teacher and his pupils, who, in the ancient Near East, would be exclusively male. A similar style is found in both Egyptian and Mesopotamian wisdom literature and could well have been adopted by Solomon, who, in the humility and God-fearing concern for the national well-being of his earlier years, would have been a teacher par excellence.<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 1: Avoiding Evil Companions (1:8-33)<\/h6>\nThree voices are raised: (1) the specious voice of those who promise quick gains by violence (vv 10-14); (2) the wise man himself (vv 15-19), who reinforces the advice of parents patiently given over the years (vv 8-9) and who advocates a clean break with violent men doomed to a violent end; and (3) Wisdom (vv 20-33), whose appeal is not furtive but open and who seeks to give others her own spirit of wisdom (v 23). Those who spurn the voice of wisdom will experience judgment (vv 29-33).<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 2: The Rewards of Wisdom (2:1-22)<\/h6>\nWhile wisdom is ultimately God-given (v 6), people must seek it with an intensity of desire that characterized the psalmist (Prv 2:2-4; cf. Ps 63:1). There is no contradiction here, but a paradox that underlines the fact that God’s gifts are not given lightly but are given to those who, by their attitude of heart and will, merit them. The benefits of wisdom outlined (Prv 2:7-22) have both negative and positive and both material and spiritual elements. The peril of associating with immoral women, which is referred to so frequently in Proverbs, is mentioned for the first time (vv 16-19).<\/p>\n<h6> Lesson 3: The Rewards of Complete Trust in God (3:1-10)<\/h6>\nFor the Jew there was always the temptation to try to ensure blessing by an outward show of religion, and verses 9-10 could be misinterpreted. But the context stresses the requirement of heart loyalty and obedience (vv 1-8). “God first” (v 6) is the fundamental need; without this an individual or a nation is impoverished (cf. Hg 1:1-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 4: The Need for Discipline (3:11-20)<\/h6>\nOne of the major themes in Proverbs is discipline, especially that of a father chastising his son (Prv 3:11-12; cf. Heb 12:5-11). The other theme here is the praise of wisdom and the benefits it bestows.<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 5: Wisdom and Common Sense (3:21-35)<\/h6>\nWisdom and common sense will result in safety (vv 23-26) and guard against unwise acts (vv 27-32). But the underlying security is found in verse 26: “The Lord<\/span> is your security.”<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 6: Determination (4:1-9)<\/h6>\nHere the teacher gives his own testimony and shows that he is drawing on the accumulated wisdom of an earlier generation (vv 1-6). There is an emphasis upon determination, with the will resolutely set to gain wisdom, as the verbs in verses 5-9 show.<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 7: The Straight Path (4:10-19)<\/h6>\nAn equal determination is necessary to keep clear of evil men and their pursuits (vv 14-17). Note the graphic description, both beautiful and frightening, of the two paths (vv 18-19).<\/p>\n<h6> Lesson 8: Pursuing Righteousness and Avoiding Evil (4:20-27)<\/h6>\nThe single-minded pursuit of righteousness and its corollary, the avoidance of every kind of evil (cf. 1 Thes 5:22), involves our hearing (Prv 4:20), memories (v 21), hearts (vv 21, 23), sight (v 25), and wills (vv 26-27). It means total commitment to God.<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 9: Sexual Purity (5:1-23)<\/h6>\nIn blunt language that cannot possibly be misunderstood, the perils of sexual prostitution and the wisdom of faithfulness within marriage are underscored. In sexual relationships there can be no purely private morality; others are necessarily involved, and God is more than a concerned spectator (v 21).<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 10: The Things God Hates (6:1-19)<\/h6>\nFirst (vv 1-5), there is straightforward advice about the need to avoid rash pledges. If one is foolish enough to be already involved, the sensible thing is to swallow one’s pride and extricate oneself as soon as possible. The second lesson—to emulate the ants in their diligent preparation for future need (vv 6-11)—anticipates the contrasting attention later given to the sluggard (22:13; 26:13-16). The third lesson describes in detail the slick, deceitful “con man” (6:12-19). He is to be avoided.<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 11: Illicit Sexual Relationships (6:20-35)<\/h6>\nThis section continues with the subject of illicit sexual relationships, showing God’s attitude to this particular form of sin. The wounded husband will prove a formidable adversary, should he discover infidelity (vv 33-35), and the effect upon the adulterer himself will be utterly disastrous (vv 26-32).<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 12: The Wiles of the Prostitute (7:1-27)<\/h6>\nThis chapter gives a graphic illustration of the wiles of a prostitute. Speciously, the pleasures she offers appear alluring, enhanced by the element of risk, but in fact the night’s adventure invariably proves to be the road to hell (v 27).<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 13: Wisdom’s Direct Appeal (8:1–9:18)<\/h6>\nIn contrast to the smooth-tongued, deadly seductress of chapter 7 and the brazen, loud-mouthed prostitute of 9:13-18, there are two complementary pictures of Wisdom. The first, in 8:1-36, is one of the most remarkable examples of personification in the OT. Wisdom seeks not the ruin of one but the welfare of all (vv 1-5). Wisdom and integrity, righteous conduct and frankness are pictured as inseparable entities (vv 6-13). But there remains an emphasis on the blessings that result from the quest for wisdom (vv 14-21). Kings, judges, and rulers are dependent on her, and success of the most desirable kind is her gift to her followers. Verses 22-31 are virtually a theological explanation for the preeminence of Wisdom, showing her close association with God’s creative activity.<\/p>\nUnderstandably, many Christians have seen in these verses an anticipation of Christ himself. The NT sees Christ as the answer to two of the most vital religious issues: how does God approach mankind, and how did he create the world? Here is the answer—by Wisdom. The connection may be carried into the next section (vv 33-36), where Wisdom, like Christ in the NT, is seen as the one absolutely essential and desirable thing.<\/p>\nIn the second picture of Wisdom (9:1-6), she is seen as a gracious, generous hostess, offering a banquet that issues in life (cf. Jesus’ parable in Lk 14:15-24). A further contrast with the immoral woman in Proverbs 9:13-18 notes, pointedly, that the latter’s guests end up in hell. A series of proverbs on the contrast between the wise and foolish (vv 7-12) come between the two pictures. They show how teachable the wise man is, in contrast to the fool. Once more the true foundation of life is clearly defined (v 10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Collected Proverbs of Solomon: 10:1–22:16<\/h5>\nThe 375 proverbs in this section were probably selected from the 3,000 for which Solomon is credited (1 Kgs 4:32). Each verse is a unit, with a contrast or a comparison between its two lines. There are understandable repetitions (e.g., Prv 14:12; 16:25), almost inevitable in a large collection of this kind. The common sense of the proverbial sayings, each of which has been proved in experience, is evident, but one must allow for varying levels; some appear rather mundane and close to worldly wisdom. But taken as a whole, they provide a practical guide, sanctioned by God, for everyday life. Again, it must be stressed that the religious life, based on the law and the covenant relationship, is assumed. God is vitally concerned with the minute details of life, and religious issues are not entirely bypassed (e.g., 10:27-29; 14:27; 15:16, 33; 18:10). This section in Proverbs cannot be read quickly; each verse demands a pause to allow its point to penetrate the mind. Since there is no systematic arrangement of the proverbs, the most helpful way of approach into this section may be by a consideration of the principal themes. It would be a valuable study to collate the references to each subject:<\/p>\n 1. The rewards of the righteous and the end of the ungodly (10:2, 7, 16, 27-30; 11:3-9).<\/p>\n<li> 2. The fool. The three Hebrew words translated “fool” can all have the sense of stubborn rebelliousness as well as dullness of intellect, so “rebel” is often an apt rendering. The fool gives his parents grief and is a menace to society. His mind is completely closed to reason and his unbridled words cause untold damage. In his case, correction is pointless; he is beyond hope.<\/li>\n<li> 3. The simple. The reference here is to the large, uncommitted group, neither fools nor wise, but those who are open to the gentle persuasion of concerned wisdom teachers. The main appeal of this section is to this group rather than to the wise and prudent, who have already “graduated.”<\/li>\n<li> 4. The lazy. This person is often contrasted with the industrious (e.g., 10:4-5) and is mercilessly satirized for his apathy and weak excuses.<\/li>\n<li> 5. The power of words. They can wound or heal (12:18). The stress on honest speech, in contrast to deceitful, thoughtless words, is well illustrated in the same chapter (e.g., 12:6, 13-14, 17-19, 22).<\/li>\n<li> 6. Wisdom. Chapter 13 shows how it may be derived from parents (v 1), the Scriptures (v 13), the class of the wise (v 14), and good company (v 20).<\/li>\n<li> 7. Justice. The stress on this echoes the great prophets. In particular, bribery is condemned (17:8, 23; 18:16), as are false witnesses (19:5, 9, 28), while open-mindedness is commended (18:17).<\/li>\n<li> 8. Neighborliness. Fair-weather “friends” are often referred to (e.g., 19:4-7) and contrasted with the true friend (17:17; 18:24).<\/li>\n<li> 9. Riches and poverty. These conditions are approached in a variety of ways, but always with an emphasis on moral and spiritual rather than merely material prosperity (e.g., 21:6; 22:1, 4). Care for the poor is frequently demanded (21:13)—to be accompanied with the highest motives (22:2).<\/li>\n<li>10. Family life. There is an attractive picture of an ideal family, with its industrious husband, an understanding wife who is a blessing to him (12:4; 14:1; 18:22; 19:14), and obedient children, disciplined when necessary by punishment (13:24; 19:18; 23:13-14).<\/li>\n<h5>The Final Section—More Wise Advice: 22:17–31:31<\/h5>\nWhile the subjects considered and the general outlook are unchanged, the proverbs in this section are generally longer and there is an evident attempt to group together proverbs dealing with particular subjects—for example, the perils of strong drink (23:29-35). The religious motive of the editor of this section is evident; he writes that people should trust in the Lord (22:19).<\/p>\n<h6>Additional Proverbs: 22:17–24:34<\/h6>\nThis may be viewed as a supplement to the previous section dealing further with the subjects of justice, wise business policy, slander, and laziness. The humorous but pointed proverb of the lazy man’s field is the longest in the book.<\/p>\n<h6>Additional Solomonic Proverbs: 25:1–29:27<\/h6>\nFrom the many Solomonic proverbs not included in the main collection (10:1–22:16), the aides of Hezekiah selected and edited a further group of Solomon’s proverbs. Again, there is evidence of an effort to group related proverbs—for example, the place of kings (25:2-7); unwise litigation (vv 8-10); the fool (26:1-12); laziness (vv 13-16); and the troublemaker (vv 17-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The Wisdom of Agur: 30:1-33<\/h6>\nThe humility of the wise man in the presence of an all-wise God emerges clearly in Agur’s introduction (vv 1-4), a passage paralleled in Job 38–39. His teaching method was apparently to confront his students with a number of examples of a point under discussion, the “two . . . three . . . four” method, indicating that the catalogue was not complete and encouraging them to add further illustrations from their own experience. Agur was evidently in close and perceptive touch with life at every level.<\/p>\n<h6>The Wisdom of Lemuel: 31:1-9<\/h6>\nThis section, inspired by his mother, deals yet again with sexual relationships, the perils of intoxication, and the need to champion the poor and oppressed. Lemuel’s name, meaning “belonging to God,” probably tells us still more about his mother.<\/p>\n<h6>The Ideal Wife: 31:10-31<\/h6>\nEvery verse of this poem, which was possibly anonymous, begins with a successive letter of the Hebrew alphabet, a device that often signified completeness. Coming at the end of Proverbs (a book that is forthright when dealing with the subject of the immoral woman), it gives, in antithesis, a refreshing picture of a cultured, well-to-do housewife and mother. At the same time, it provides an enlightening insight into several facets of contemporary life. As elsewhere in the book, her underlying relationship to God (v 30) results in desirable virtues that include trustworthiness (v 11), immense application (vv 13-19, 24, 27), charity (vv 19-20), foresight (vv 21, 25), wisdom, and kindness (v 26).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Poetry, Biblical; Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROVERBS, Book of<\/span><\/h3>\nThird poetical book in the OT. A collection of striking, epigrammatic expressions concerning practical wisdom by example, warning, or precept.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Authors<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthors<\/p>\nWhile there is an underlying unity of thought in the book of Proverbs, there is no presumption of unity of authorship, since the writers of the seven or more sections into which the book is divided are, in most cases, clearly noted.<\/p>\n<h5>1:1–9:18<\/h5>\nThere is a division of opinion as to whether the opening verse refers to the Solomonic authorship of this section or whether it simply underscores the name of the main contributor to the entire book. It is objected that the man who wrote so carefully about the danger of promiscuous relationships with immoral women—one of the main themes of this section—is not likely to be Solomon, who failed significantly in the matter of mixed marriages (1 Kgs 11:1-8). There are flaws in such an argument. One may be capable of giving excellent advice without necessarily having the strength of character to follow it oneself, and there is a distinction between the seductive prostitutes or adulteresses of Proverbs 5:1-21, 6:20-35, 7:1-27 and Solomon’s polygamous but respectable relationships. However, the question of authorship is probably best left open. Those who question the Solomonic origin of this section regard 1:2-7 as setting out the purpose of the whole book. Proverbs 1:8–9:18 is a series of 13 practical discourses on wisdom, lovingly and honestly given as by a father to a son. This provides an indispensable foundation for the more popular proverbial teaching in the remainder of the book.<\/p>\n<h5>10:1–22:16<\/h5>\nSolomon is specifically noted as the author or compiler of this main section of Proverbs. The probability that he played a major part in the production of the book of Proverbs finds strong support in the historical books. Soon after his coronation he was endowed with the spirit of wisdom—in response to his request (1 Kgs 3:5-14). The incident concerning the two prostitutes (vv 16-28) provided public proof of this. His universal reputation, especially in connection with proverbial wisdom, is attested to in 1 Kings 4:29-34 and in the visit of the queen of Sheba (10:1-13).<\/p>\n<h5>22:17–24:34<\/h5>\nThe title “the words of the wise” (Prv 22:17, neb<\/span>) is incorporated into the opening verse of this section. An evident difference of style, replacing the simple, one-verse proverb by a more discursive approach that deals with a subject over several verses, and the title of the next subsection “These also are sayings of the wise” (24:23), strongly suggest the independence of this collection. Of major interest is the remarkably close parallel between 22:17–23:11 and the Egyptian book of Amenemope, which has been dated variously between the 13th and 7th centuries BC<\/span>. Scholars have detected as many as 30 connections between the two. Most think that this section in Proverbs is an adaptation of an Egyptian original (such selection and modification being entirely congruous with the doctrine of inspiration). However, a minority of scholars, including several prominent Egyptologists, argue persuasively on the basis of grammatical structure that Amenemope is derived from a Hebrew original.<\/p>\n<h5>25:1–29:27<\/h5>\nSome material of Solomon’s has here been edited and incorporated by “the men of Hezekiah king of Judah” (25:1). In this section there is a tendency to group together proverbs dealing with specific subjects—for example, the relationship between a king and his subjects (vv 2-7), the lazy man (26:13-16), and the mischief maker (vv 17-27). Solomon and Hezekiah were frequently linked together in Jewish thought (e.g., 2 Chr 30:26), and rabbinic tradition credited Hezekiah with the production of both Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. The national prestige during the reigns of both kings would have been conducive to literary pursuits.<\/p>\n<h5>30:1-33<\/h5>\nNothing is known of Agur, of his father, Jakeh of Massa, or of the two other characters mentioned, Ithiel and Ucal. According to Genesis 25:14, Massa was one of the 12 sons of Ishmael, and it is likely that Agur came from north Arabia, an area traditionally renowned for its wisdom.<\/p>\n<h5>31:1-9<\/h5>\nLemuel, the author of this section, also came from Massa, but apart from this is unknown. The inclusion of wisdom sayings from sources outside Israel illustrates the international connections of the wisdom movement during the period of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<h5>31:10-31<\/h5>\nIt is possible that Lemuel’s authorship includes this superb acrostic poem on the ideal wife; its inspiration may have come from his mother, like the earlier section. But the pattern of life would fit more easily into the context of a prosperous, agricultural community in Palestine rather than in an Arabian nomadic or seminomadic community. For this reason, most scholars regard the poem as anonymous.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nThe larger part of the book may, with confidence, be ascribed to Solomon (ruled c. 970–930 BC<\/span>). But the considerable contribution of Hezekiah and his men rules out a date for the completion of the book before 700 BC<\/span>. The inclusion of sections by non-Israelites, like Agur and Lemuel, is more likely in the preexilic period, with its wider international interests, than in the more particularistic atmosphere of postexilic Judaism. Probably the final, sophisticated acrostic poem was the last section to be included, but there is nothing in the book that demands a date later than the early seventh century BC<\/span>. In rabbinic tradition Proverbs was invariably grouped with Psalms and Job in the third section of the Jewish canon, the Writings or Holy Books. While the content of the Writings was not authoritatively finalized until the end of the first century AD<\/span>, it is likely that Proverbs was accepted as inspired long before this, as witnessed by its inclusion in the Septuagint, the principal Greek translation. The order in our English versions may have been influenced by the rabbinic tradition that linked the books of Job, Psalms, and Proverbs with Moses, David, and Hezekiah, respectively.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThe book of Proverbs is included in the OT corpus of books known as the Wisdom Literature. This corpus is further represented in Scripture by the books of Job and Ecclesiastes and some of the Psalms (e.g., Pss 1, 37, 73, 119). Proverbs represents one major class of this literature. Individual proverbs contain sharp, practical applications of wisdom covering many facets of life. Job and Ecclesiastes focus on one major problem, or a group of interrelated problems, in monologue or dialogue form.<\/p>\nIn the ancient Near East, wisdom was originally connected with all skills, manual as well as intellectual, and was considered to be the gift of the gods. Gradually it acquired a dominantly intellectual significance, particularly in a cultic setting, in such magical or semimagical arts as exorcism. A wide range of wisdom literature from Egypt, Canaan, and Mesopotamia, of the two basic types noted in the preceding paragraph, has survived, making it possible to see its Hebrew counterpart against this background. There is no duplication, however, and the spirit of the Hebrew Wisdom Literature is markedly superior to anything comparable in the ancient world. This is due principally to the strong religious foundation in Israel, where wisdom’s first step was to trust and revere the Lord (Prv 1:7).<\/p>\nWhen Israel emerged as a nation in the Mosaic period, it was in a world where individuals or groups of “the wise” already existed. Israel shared this inheritance, with both men and women being involved, as witnessed by the wise women of Tekoa and Abel in Beth-maacah (2 Sm 14:2; 20:16) and the professional military or civic court counselors Ahithophel and Hushai (2 Sm 15:1-2, 31; 16:15-19). Proverbs shows this group of “the wise” at its best; the life of uprightness, diligence, honesty, and self-control that it advocates sets a standard of morality that accords with the law on which it was based. But it is probable that many proverbs predate the emergence of a class of the wise. Most communities develop their own collections of short, witty sayings that express practical wisdom and form a store of primitive philosophy. Solomon’s part in giving definitive shape to Israel’s proverbs (1 Kgs 4:32) has already been noted. The antithetic form of Hebrew poetry, where the parallelism of the second line allows either a sharp contrast (as generally in Proverbs 10–15) or further support (i.e., synonymous parallelism, as in chs 16–22) is an ideal medium for the proverb. When the class of “the wise” developed, this popular wisdom became part of their provenance.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theology<\/p>\n<h5>The Close Relationship between Religion and Everyday Life<\/h5>\nWhile the general tone of Proverbs is dominantly rational, the importance of fearing (showing reverence to) the Lord is stressed throughout the book (1:7; 2:5; 3:7; 8:13; etc.). This “fear of the Lord” is one of the main definitions of religion in the OT, the other being “the knowledge of God” stressed especially by Hosea and Jeremiah (Jer 9:24; Hos 4:1). Both are found in parallel in Proverbs 2:5 and 9:10. Far from there being an unbridgeable gap between religion and the secular world, Proverbs shows the results, in noble character and harmonious, happy homes, when the whole of life is brought under God’s control. A danger exists when the moral elements are taken in isolation from the religious foundation that is assumed throughout. Then the pursuit for happiness or success can become selfish, inward-looking, and ultimately self-defeating.<\/p>\n<h5>Proverbs and the Prophetic Movement<\/h5>\nThere are many similarities between Proverbs and the Prophets, including a down-to-earth realism; a championing of the poor and underprivileged groups (e.g., 14:31); a realization of the inefficacy of sacrifice apart from morality (15:8; 21:27); and an emphasis on the individual, which was sometimes overlooked because of the strong sense of corporate identity within the covenant community. Jeremiah and Ezekiel, especially, restated strongly the theme of individual responsibility (Jer 31:29-30; Ez 18). But there is a vital difference that Proverbs shares with the remainder of biblical Wisdom Literature, namely, the absence of any clear, historical reference to Israel’s election and covenant relationship with God. This was the consistent point of appeal of the great preexilic prophets. Similarly, Jerusalem and its temple theology are not mentioned, although the wisdom movement, especially as reflected in Proverbs, flourished under the patronage of the Davidic monarchy. Even the name Israel does not occur. This has lent strength to the view that Proverbs is the clearest and most comprehensive manual of universal, practical ethics existing in the ancient world. An educated contemporary Egyptian would have found Proverbs readily comprehensible and uplifting, and although this was not its primary purpose, the book still has a strong appeal to the moral non-Christian.<\/p>\n<h5>Proverbs and Deuteronomy<\/h5>\nProverbs shares many features with the book of Deuteronomy, especially its emphasis on retribution and reward (Prv 2:22; 3:9-10; 10:27-30; cf. Dt 28). This doctrine could be perverted into an invariable equation: the righteous are always rewarded and the wicked are always punished. That is a view against which Job (Jb 21:7-34) and Jeremiah (Jer 12:1-4) protested strongly. It could also result in a hypocritical, self-seeking approach; I want the blessings promised (e.g., Prv 3:9-10), therefore I will “honor” God in the matter of tithes. This substitution of an outward show for the inward dynamic of love, gratitude, and faith was often the curse of Israel’s formalized religion. However, the principle itself—that those who honor God and live in cooperation with him and his laws are generally those who are God-blessed (not necessarily in material terms)—is a scriptural one, and the authors of Proverbs must not be blamed for the perversions that arose subsequently.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\n<h5>Introduction: 1:1-7<\/h5>\nProverbs 1:1-7 sets out the purpose of the wisdom movement in Israel. The subtitle of the whole book is found in verse 2: “The purpose of these proverbs is to teach people wisdom and discipline, and to help them understand wise sayings” (nlt<\/span>). The question of the authorship of this section has already been discussed, but there is certainly nothing incongruous about Solomon’s authorship. In the earlier part of his reign, Solomon showed a deep longing for the wisdom that was required to govern his people rightly (1 Kgs 3:7-9), and there is the earnest desire here that his subjects might have a similar understanding. Verses 1-6 form one sentence in Hebrew and include no fewer than 11 different aspects of wisdom. The first of them, “wisdom,” occurs 37 times in Proverbs and indicates an informed, skillful use of knowledge. It is only by taking the first step of trusting in the Lord that a person can enter into wisdom. Morality is not situational, nor an absolute in itself; it requires an unchanging point of reference that can only be found in God.<\/p>\n<h5>Lessons on Wisdom: 1:8–9:18<\/h5>\nThis section is composed of 13 distinct lessons on wisdom, most of which are introduced by “My son” or something similar. The final lesson (8:1–9:18) is given by Wisdom herself. This method indicates the warm, personal relationship between the teacher and his pupils, who, in the ancient Near East, would be exclusively male. A similar style is found in both Egyptian and Mesopotamian wisdom literature and could well have been adopted by Solomon, who, in the humility and God-fearing concern for the national well-being of his earlier years, would have been a teacher par excellence.<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 1: Avoiding Evil Companions (1:8-33)<\/h6>\nThree voices are raised: (1) the specious voice of those who promise quick gains by violence (vv 10-14); (2) the wise man himself (vv 15-19), who reinforces the advice of parents patiently given over the years (vv 8-9) and who advocates a clean break with violent men doomed to a violent end; and (3) Wisdom (vv 20-33), whose appeal is not furtive but open and who seeks to give others her own spirit of wisdom (v 23). Those who spurn the voice of wisdom will experience judgment (vv 29-33).<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 2: The Rewards of Wisdom (2:1-22)<\/h6>\nWhile wisdom is ultimately God-given (v 6), people must seek it with an intensity of desire that characterized the psalmist (Prv 2:2-4; cf. Ps 63:1). There is no contradiction here, but a paradox that underlines the fact that God’s gifts are not given lightly but are given to those who, by their attitude of heart and will, merit them. The benefits of wisdom outlined (Prv 2:7-22) have both negative and positive and both material and spiritual elements. The peril of associating with immoral women, which is referred to so frequently in Proverbs, is mentioned for the first time (vv 16-19).<\/p>\n<h6> Lesson 3: The Rewards of Complete Trust in God (3:1-10)<\/h6>\nFor the Jew there was always the temptation to try to ensure blessing by an outward show of religion, and verses 9-10 could be misinterpreted. But the context stresses the requirement of heart loyalty and obedience (vv 1-8). “God first” (v 6) is the fundamental need; without this an individual or a nation is impoverished (cf. Hg 1:1-11).<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 4: The Need for Discipline (3:11-20)<\/h6>\nOne of the major themes in Proverbs is discipline, especially that of a father chastising his son (Prv 3:11-12; cf. Heb 12:5-11). The other theme here is the praise of wisdom and the benefits it bestows.<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 5: Wisdom and Common Sense (3:21-35)<\/h6>\nWisdom and common sense will result in safety (vv 23-26) and guard against unwise acts (vv 27-32). But the underlying security is found in verse 26: “The Lord<\/span> is your security.”<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 6: Determination (4:1-9)<\/h6>\nHere the teacher gives his own testimony and shows that he is drawing on the accumulated wisdom of an earlier generation (vv 1-6). There is an emphasis upon determination, with the will resolutely set to gain wisdom, as the verbs in verses 5-9 show.<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 7: The Straight Path (4:10-19)<\/h6>\nAn equal determination is necessary to keep clear of evil men and their pursuits (vv 14-17). Note the graphic description, both beautiful and frightening, of the two paths (vv 18-19).<\/p>\n<h6> Lesson 8: Pursuing Righteousness and Avoiding Evil (4:20-27)<\/h6>\nThe single-minded pursuit of righteousness and its corollary, the avoidance of every kind of evil (cf. 1 Thes 5:22), involves our hearing (Prv 4:20), memories (v 21), hearts (vv 21, 23), sight (v 25), and wills (vv 26-27). It means total commitment to God.<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 9: Sexual Purity (5:1-23)<\/h6>\nIn blunt language that cannot possibly be misunderstood, the perils of sexual prostitution and the wisdom of faithfulness within marriage are underscored. In sexual relationships there can be no purely private morality; others are necessarily involved, and God is more than a concerned spectator (v 21).<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 10: The Things God Hates (6:1-19)<\/h6>\nFirst (vv 1-5), there is straightforward advice about the need to avoid rash pledges. If one is foolish enough to be already involved, the sensible thing is to swallow one’s pride and extricate oneself as soon as possible. The second lesson—to emulate the ants in their diligent preparation for future need (vv 6-11)—anticipates the contrasting attention later given to the sluggard (22:13; 26:13-16). The third lesson describes in detail the slick, deceitful “con man” (6:12-19). He is to be avoided.<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 11: Illicit Sexual Relationships (6:20-35)<\/h6>\nThis section continues with the subject of illicit sexual relationships, showing God’s attitude to this particular form of sin. The wounded husband will prove a formidable adversary, should he discover infidelity (vv 33-35), and the effect upon the adulterer himself will be utterly disastrous (vv 26-32).<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 12: The Wiles of the Prostitute (7:1-27)<\/h6>\nThis chapter gives a graphic illustration of the wiles of a prostitute. Speciously, the pleasures she offers appear alluring, enhanced by the element of risk, but in fact the night’s adventure invariably proves to be the road to hell (v 27).<\/p>\n<h6>Lesson 13: Wisdom’s Direct Appeal (8:1–9:18)<\/h6>\nIn contrast to the smooth-tongued, deadly seductress of chapter 7 and the brazen, loud-mouthed prostitute of 9:13-18, there are two complementary pictures of Wisdom. The first, in 8:1-36, is one of the most remarkable examples of personification in the OT. Wisdom seeks not the ruin of one but the welfare of all (vv 1-5). Wisdom and integrity, righteous conduct and frankness are pictured as inseparable entities (vv 6-13). But there remains an emphasis on the blessings that result from the quest for wisdom (vv 14-21). Kings, judges, and rulers are dependent on her, and success of the most desirable kind is her gift to her followers. Verses 22-31 are virtually a theological explanation for the preeminence of Wisdom, showing her close association with God’s creative activity.<\/p>\nUnderstandably, many Christians have seen in these verses an anticipation of Christ himself. The NT sees Christ as the answer to two of the most vital religious issues: how does God approach mankind, and how did he create the world? Here is the answer—by Wisdom. The connection may be carried into the next section (vv 33-36), where Wisdom, like Christ in the NT, is seen as the one absolutely essential and desirable thing.<\/p>\nIn the second picture of Wisdom (9:1-6), she is seen as a gracious, generous hostess, offering a banquet that issues in life (cf. Jesus’ parable in Lk 14:15-24). A further contrast with the immoral woman in Proverbs 9:13-18 notes, pointedly, that the latter’s guests end up in hell. A series of proverbs on the contrast between the wise and foolish (vv 7-12) come between the two pictures. They show how teachable the wise man is, in contrast to the fool. Once more the true foundation of life is clearly defined (v 10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Collected Proverbs of Solomon: 10:1–22:16<\/h5>\nThe 375 proverbs in this section were probably selected from the 3,000 for which Solomon is credited (1 Kgs 4:32). Each verse is a unit, with a contrast or a comparison between its two lines. There are understandable repetitions (e.g., Prv 14:12; 16:25), almost inevitable in a large collection of this kind. The common sense of the proverbial sayings, each of which has been proved in experience, is evident, but one must allow for varying levels; some appear rather mundane and close to worldly wisdom. But taken as a whole, they provide a practical guide, sanctioned by God, for everyday life. Again, it must be stressed that the religious life, based on the law and the covenant relationship, is assumed. God is vitally concerned with the minute details of life, and religious issues are not entirely bypassed (e.g., 10:27-29; 14:27; 15:16, 33; 18:10). This section in Proverbs cannot be read quickly; each verse demands a pause to allow its point to penetrate the mind. Since there is no systematic arrangement of the proverbs, the most helpful way of approach into this section may be by a consideration of the principal themes. It would be a valuable study to collate the references to each subject:<\/p>\n 1. The rewards of the righteous and the end of the ungodly (10:2, 7, 16, 27-30; 11:3-9).<\/p>\n<li> 2. The fool. The three Hebrew words translated “fool” can all have the sense of stubborn rebelliousness as well as dullness of intellect, so “rebel” is often an apt rendering. The fool gives his parents grief and is a menace to society. His mind is completely closed to reason and his unbridled words cause untold damage. In his case, correction is pointless; he is beyond hope.<\/li>\n<li> 3. The simple. The reference here is to the large, uncommitted group, neither fools nor wise, but those who are open to the gentle persuasion of concerned wisdom teachers. The main appeal of this section is to this group rather than to the wise and prudent, who have already “graduated.”<\/li>\n<li> 4. The lazy. This person is often contrasted with the industrious (e.g., 10:4-5) and is mercilessly satirized for his apathy and weak excuses.<\/li>\n<li> 5. The power of words. They can wound or heal (12:18). The stress on honest speech, in contrast to deceitful, thoughtless words, is well illustrated in the same chapter (e.g., 12:6, 13-14, 17-19, 22).<\/li>\n<li> 6. Wisdom. Chapter 13 shows how it may be derived from parents (v 1), the Scriptures (v 13), the class of the wise (v 14), and good company (v 20).<\/li>\n<li> 7. Justice. The stress on this echoes the great prophets. In particular, bribery is condemned (17:8, 23; 18:16), as are false witnesses (19:5, 9, 28), while open-mindedness is commended (18:17).<\/li>\n<li> 8. Neighborliness. Fair-weather “friends” are often referred to (e.g., 19:4-7) and contrasted with the true friend (17:17; 18:24).<\/li>\n<li> 9. Riches and poverty. These conditions are approached in a variety of ways, but always with an emphasis on moral and spiritual rather than merely material prosperity (e.g., 21:6; 22:1, 4). Care for the poor is frequently demanded (21:13)—to be accompanied with the highest motives (22:2).<\/li>\n<li>10. Family life. There is an attractive picture of an ideal family, with its industrious husband, an understanding wife who is a blessing to him (12:4; 14:1; 18:22; 19:14), and obedient children, disciplined when necessary by punishment (13:24; 19:18; 23:13-14).<\/li>\n<h5>The Final Section—More Wise Advice: 22:17–31:31<\/h5>\nWhile the subjects considered and the general outlook are unchanged, the proverbs in this section are generally longer and there is an evident attempt to group together proverbs dealing with particular subjects—for example, the perils of strong drink (23:29-35). The religious motive of the editor of this section is evident; he writes that people should trust in the Lord (22:19).<\/p>\n<h6>Additional Proverbs: 22:17–24:34<\/h6>\nThis may be viewed as a supplement to the previous section dealing further with the subjects of justice, wise business policy, slander, and laziness. The humorous but pointed proverb of the lazy man’s field is the longest in the book.<\/p>\n<h6>Additional Solomonic Proverbs: 25:1–29:27<\/h6>\nFrom the many Solomonic proverbs not included in the main collection (10:1–22:16), the aides of Hezekiah selected and edited a further group of Solomon’s proverbs. Again, there is evidence of an effort to group related proverbs—for example, the place of kings (25:2-7); unwise litigation (vv 8-10); the fool (26:1-12); laziness (vv 13-16); and the troublemaker (vv 17-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The Wisdom of Agur: 30:1-33<\/h6>\nThe humility of the wise man in the presence of an all-wise God emerges clearly in Agur’s introduction (vv 1-4), a passage paralleled in Job 38–39. His teaching method was apparently to confront his students with a number of examples of a point under discussion, the “two . . . three . . . four” method, indicating that the catalogue was not complete and encouraging them to add further illustrations from their own experience. Agur was evidently in close and perceptive touch with life at every level.<\/p>\n<h6>The Wisdom of Lemuel: 31:1-9<\/h6>\nThis section, inspired by his mother, deals yet again with sexual relationships, the perils of intoxication, and the need to champion the poor and oppressed. Lemuel’s name, meaning “belonging to God,” probably tells us still more about his mother.<\/p>\n<h6>The Ideal Wife: 31:10-31<\/h6>\nEvery verse of this poem, which was possibly anonymous, begins with a successive letter of the Hebrew alphabet, a device that often signified completeness. Coming at the end of Proverbs (a book that is forthright when dealing with the subject of the immoral woman), it gives, in antithesis, a refreshing picture of a cultured, well-to-do housewife and mother. At the same time, it provides an enlightening insight into several facets of contemporary life. As elsewhere in the book, her underlying relationship to God (v 30) results in desirable virtues that include trustworthiness (v 11), immense application (vv 13-19, 24, 27), charity (vv 19-20), foresight (vv 21, 25), wisdom, and kindness (v 26).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Poetry, Biblical; Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROVERBS, Book of Third poetical book in the OT. A collection of striking, epigrammatic expressions concerning practical wisdom by example, warning, or precept. Preview • Authors • Date • Background • Purpose and Theology • Content Authors While there is an underlying unity of thought in the book of Proverbs, there is no presumption of unity of authorship, since the writers of the seven or more sections into which the book is divided are, in most cases, clearly noted. 1:1–9:18 There is a divi...","summary_en":"PROVERBS, Book of Third poetical book in the OT. A collection of striking, epigrammatic expressions concerning practical wisdom by example, warning, or precept. Preview • Authors • Date • Background • Purpose and Theology • Content Authors While there is an underlying unity of thought in the book of Proverbs, there is no presumption of unity of authorship, since the writers of the seven or more sections into which the book is divided are, in most cases, clearly noted. 1:1–9:18 There is a divi...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35477,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sin","title_en":"Sin","content_ro":"<h3>SIN<\/h3>\nEvildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT.<\/p>\nTerminology<\/p>\nIsrael’s God sets the ideal, the standard for human behavior. The most frequent biblical words for sin speak of violating that standard in some fashion. The Hebrew word hata’<\/span> and Greek hamartia<\/span> meant originally “to miss the mark, fail in duty” (Rom 3:23). As Lawgiver, God sets limits to man’s freedom; another frequent term (Hebrew, ‘abar<\/span>;<\/em> Greek, parabasis<\/span>) describes sin as “transgression,” “overstepping set limits.” Similar terms are pesha‘<\/span> (Hebrew), meaning “rebellion,” “transgression”; ’asham<\/span> (Hebrew) denotes “trespassing God’s kingly prerogative,” “incurring guilt”; paraptoma<\/span> (Greek) denotes “a false step out of the appointed way,” “trespass on forbidden ground.” “Iniquity” often translates ‘aon<\/span> (Hebrew, meaning “perverseness,” “wrongness”), for which the nearest NT equivalent is anomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawlessness”) or paranomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawbreaking”).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament<\/p>\nGenesis traces sin to deliberate misuse of God-given freedom in disobedience of a single limiting prohibition. Ezekiel insists eloquently upon individual responsibility against traditional theories of corporate guilt (Ez 18). Following Jeremiah, he urges the need for a cleansed, renewed inner life if outward behavior is to be reformed; the divine law must become a motivating force within a person if sin is to be overcome (Jer 31:29-34; Ez 36:24-29).<\/p>\nPsalm 51 offers a keen analysis of the inner meaning of sin. By affirming “in sin did my mother conceive me,” the psalmist confessed that his life had been sinful from the first. His whole personality needed “purging”; he was defiled. Ritual sacrifices offer no solution. Only a broken, contrite heart can prepare a sinner for God’s cleansing. The only hope, the sole ground of appeal, lies in God’s steadfast love and abundant mercy. In spite of its rigorous view of sin, the OT also contains gracious assurance of forgiveness (Ps 103:8-14 Is 1:18; 55:6-7).<\/p>\nIn Jesus’ Teachings<\/p>\nJesus’ teachings on the subject of sin took up the gracious offer of divine forgiveness and renewal, not only proclaiming with authority, “Your sins are forgiven,” but showing many acts of compassion and social recognition that he came to be the friend of sinners, calling them to repentance, restoring their hope and dignity (Mt 9:1-13; 11:19; Lk 15; 19:1-10).<\/p>\nJesus said little about the origin of sin, except to trace it to the human heart and will (Mt 6:22-23; 7:17-19; 18:7; Mk 7:20-23), but he significantly redefined sin’s scope. Where the law could assess only people’s actions, Jesus showed that anger, contempt, lust, hardness of heart, and deceitfulness are also sinful. He also spoke of sins of neglect, good left undone, the barren tree, the unused talent, the priest ignoring the injured, and the love never shown (Mt 25:41-46). He especially condemns sins against love—unbrotherliness, implacable hostility, selfishness, insensitivity (Lk 12:16-21; 16:19-31). And he condemned self-righteousness and spiritual blindness (Mt 23:16-26; Mk 3:22-30). Jesus spoke of sin as sickness (Mk 2:17) and sometimes as folly (Lk 12:20). Nevertheless, Jesus declared that fallen humans can be cured with God’s help (7:36-50).<\/p>\nIn John’s Writings<\/p>\nJohn’s Gospel assumes sinful humanity’s need, the sacrifice of Christ the Lamb to bear away the sin of the world, and the offer of light and life in Christ. The new note is an emphasis on sin that refuses to accept the salvation provided in Christ, by the love of God for the world—the refusal to believe. It is for loving darkness, rejecting light, and refusing to accept Christ the Savior that humans are judged already (Jn 3:16-21).<\/p>\nAgainst Gnosticism’s claim that for advanced Christians sin does not matter, 1 John affirms 15 reasons why sin cannot be tolerated in the Christian life and emphasizes again that sin is both ignorance of the truth and lack of love (1 Jn 3:3-10). Yet God forgives those who confess their sins, while Christ atones for their sins and intercedes for them (1:7–2:2).<\/p>\nIn Paul’s Writings<\/p>\nPaul argued strongly, from observation and from Scripture, that all have sinned (Rom 1–3). To him, sin is a force, a power, a “law” ruling within people (Rom 5:21; 7:23; 8:2; 1 Cor 15:56), producing all kinds of evil behavior—the hardening of the conscience (Rom 7:21-24), alienation from God, and subjection to death (Rom 5:10; 6:23; Eph 2:1-5, 12; Col 1:21). Humans are helpless to reform themselves (Rom 7:24). Paul’s explanation of this desperate, universal condition is variously interpreted. Some readers think that Romans 5:12-21 says that Adam’s sin is the source of all sin; others, that it is the “similitude” (kjv<\/span>) of all sin. In any event, Paul essentially said that “every man is his own Adam,” which means that each person is fully responsible for his or her sinful condition, even if the sinful nature was inherited from Adam.<\/p>\nThe solution to sin, for Paul, lies in the believer’s death with Christ—death to sin, self, the world. Concurrently, the new life of the invasive, effusive Spirit transforms one’s life from within, making each person a new creation by sanctifying the personality into the likeness of Christ (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-9; 6; 8:1-4, 28-29; 2 Cor 5:14-21).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Flesh; Justification, Justified; Sanctification; Sin unto Death; Unpardonable Sin, The.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SIN<\/h3>\nEvildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT.<\/p>\nTerminology<\/p>\nIsrael’s God sets the ideal, the standard for human behavior. The most frequent biblical words for sin speak of violating that standard in some fashion. The Hebrew word hata’<\/span> and Greek hamartia<\/span> meant originally “to miss the mark, fail in duty” (Rom 3:23). As Lawgiver, God sets limits to man’s freedom; another frequent term (Hebrew, ‘abar<\/span>;<\/em> Greek, parabasis<\/span>) describes sin as “transgression,” “overstepping set limits.” Similar terms are pesha‘<\/span> (Hebrew), meaning “rebellion,” “transgression”; ’asham<\/span> (Hebrew) denotes “trespassing God’s kingly prerogative,” “incurring guilt”; paraptoma<\/span> (Greek) denotes “a false step out of the appointed way,” “trespass on forbidden ground.” “Iniquity” often translates ‘aon<\/span> (Hebrew, meaning “perverseness,” “wrongness”), for which the nearest NT equivalent is anomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawlessness”) or paranomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawbreaking”).<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament<\/p>\nGenesis traces sin to deliberate misuse of God-given freedom in disobedience of a single limiting prohibition. Ezekiel insists eloquently upon individual responsibility against traditional theories of corporate guilt (Ez 18). Following Jeremiah, he urges the need for a cleansed, renewed inner life if outward behavior is to be reformed; the divine law must become a motivating force within a person if sin is to be overcome (Jer 31:29-34; Ez 36:24-29).<\/p>\nPsalm 51 offers a keen analysis of the inner meaning of sin. By affirming “in sin did my mother conceive me,” the psalmist confessed that his life had been sinful from the first. His whole personality needed “purging”; he was defiled. Ritual sacrifices offer no solution. Only a broken, contrite heart can prepare a sinner for God’s cleansing. The only hope, the sole ground of appeal, lies in God’s steadfast love and abundant mercy. In spite of its rigorous view of sin, the OT also contains gracious assurance of forgiveness (Ps 103:8-14 Is 1:18; 55:6-7).<\/p>\nIn Jesus’ Teachings<\/p>\nJesus’ teachings on the subject of sin took up the gracious offer of divine forgiveness and renewal, not only proclaiming with authority, “Your sins are forgiven,” but showing many acts of compassion and social recognition that he came to be the friend of sinners, calling them to repentance, restoring their hope and dignity (Mt 9:1-13; 11:19; Lk 15; 19:1-10).<\/p>\nJesus said little about the origin of sin, except to trace it to the human heart and will (Mt 6:22-23; 7:17-19; 18:7; Mk 7:20-23), but he significantly redefined sin’s scope. Where the law could assess only people’s actions, Jesus showed that anger, contempt, lust, hardness of heart, and deceitfulness are also sinful. He also spoke of sins of neglect, good left undone, the barren tree, the unused talent, the priest ignoring the injured, and the love never shown (Mt 25:41-46). He especially condemns sins against love—unbrotherliness, implacable hostility, selfishness, insensitivity (Lk 12:16-21; 16:19-31). And he condemned self-righteousness and spiritual blindness (Mt 23:16-26; Mk 3:22-30). Jesus spoke of sin as sickness (Mk 2:17) and sometimes as folly (Lk 12:20). Nevertheless, Jesus declared that fallen humans can be cured with God’s help (7:36-50).<\/p>\nIn John’s Writings<\/p>\nJohn’s Gospel assumes sinful humanity’s need, the sacrifice of Christ the Lamb to bear away the sin of the world, and the offer of light and life in Christ. The new note is an emphasis on sin that refuses to accept the salvation provided in Christ, by the love of God for the world—the refusal to believe. It is for loving darkness, rejecting light, and refusing to accept Christ the Savior that humans are judged already (Jn 3:16-21).<\/p>\nAgainst Gnosticism’s claim that for advanced Christians sin does not matter, 1 John affirms 15 reasons why sin cannot be tolerated in the Christian life and emphasizes again that sin is both ignorance of the truth and lack of love (1 Jn 3:3-10). Yet God forgives those who confess their sins, while Christ atones for their sins and intercedes for them (1:7–2:2).<\/p>\nIn Paul’s Writings<\/p>\nPaul argued strongly, from observation and from Scripture, that all have sinned (Rom 1–3). To him, sin is a force, a power, a “law” ruling within people (Rom 5:21; 7:23; 8:2; 1 Cor 15:56), producing all kinds of evil behavior—the hardening of the conscience (Rom 7:21-24), alienation from God, and subjection to death (Rom 5:10; 6:23; Eph 2:1-5, 12; Col 1:21). Humans are helpless to reform themselves (Rom 7:24). Paul’s explanation of this desperate, universal condition is variously interpreted. Some readers think that Romans 5:12-21 says that Adam’s sin is the source of all sin; others, that it is the “similitude” (kjv<\/span>) of all sin. In any event, Paul essentially said that “every man is his own Adam,” which means that each person is fully responsible for his or her sinful condition, even if the sinful nature was inherited from Adam.<\/p>\nThe solution to sin, for Paul, lies in the believer’s death with Christ—death to sin, self, the world. Concurrently, the new life of the invasive, effusive Spirit transforms one’s life from within, making each person a new creation by sanctifying the personality into the likeness of Christ (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-9; 6; 8:1-4, 28-29; 2 Cor 5:14-21).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Flesh; Justification, Justified; Sanctification; Sin unto Death; Unpardonable Sin, The.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SIN Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT. Terminology Israel’s God...","summary_en":"SIN Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT. Terminology Israel’s God...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52529,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:29","content_ro":"31:29-30<\/strong> Some seemed to think that this proverb<\/em> (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).<\/p>","content_en":"31:29-30<\/strong> Some seemed to think that this proverb<\/em> (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:29-30 Some seemed to think that this proverb (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).","summary_en":"31:29-30 Some seemed to think that this proverb (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80155,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:29","content_ro":"31:29-30<\/strong> Some seemed to think that this proverb<\/em> (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).<\/p>","content_en":"31:29-30<\/strong> Some seemed to think that this proverb<\/em> (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:29-30 Some seemed to think that this proverb (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).","summary_en":"31:29-30 Some seemed to think that this proverb (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107781,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:29","content_ro":"31:29-30<\/strong> Some seemed to think that this proverb<\/em> (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).<\/p>","content_en":"31:29-30<\/strong> Some seemed to think that this proverb<\/em> (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:29-30 Some seemed to think that this proverb (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).","summary_en":"31:29-30 Some seemed to think that this proverb (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135407,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:29","content_ro":"31:29-30<\/strong> Some seemed to think that this proverb<\/em> (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).<\/p>","content_en":"31:29-30<\/strong> Some seemed to think that this proverb<\/em> (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:29-30 Some seemed to think that this proverb (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).","summary_en":"31:29-30 Some seemed to think that this proverb (apparently a misinterpretation of Exod 20:5; 34:7; Num 14:18) meant that innocent children were dying because of their parents’ sins. The Lord made it clear that each individual is punished for his or her own sins (see Lam 5:7; Ezek 18:2-32; 33:10-20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60947,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","title_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","content_ro":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\nShould an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\nWhy did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\nIf Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\nBut what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\nTo understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\nBecause we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\nNone of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\nShould an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\nWhy did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\nIf Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\nBut what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\nTo understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\nBecause we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\nNone of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","summary_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88573,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","title_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","content_ro":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\nShould an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\nWhy did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\nIf Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\nBut what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\nTo understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\nBecause we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\nNone of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\nShould an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\nWhy did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\nIf Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\nBut what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\nTo understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\nBecause we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\nNone of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","summary_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116199,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","title_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","content_ro":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\nShould an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\nWhy did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\nIf Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\nBut what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\nTo understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\nBecause we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\nNone of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\nShould an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\nWhy did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\nIf Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\nBut what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\nTo understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\nBecause we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\nNone of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","summary_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143825,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","title_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin","content_ro":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\nShould an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\nWhy did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\nIf Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\nBut what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\nTo understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\nBecause we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\nNone of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin<\/h3>\nShould an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few?<\/p>\nWhy did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility.<\/p>\nIf Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin when people either actively participate in an act of sin or silently condone sinful actions or attitudes.<\/p>\nBut what about Achan’s children who were too young to understand or those who had no knowledge of his theft? What about Israel’s soldiers who died at Ai because Achan stole what belonged to God?<\/p>\nTo understand, we have to go back to the beginning. The sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve (Gen 3), was at least twofold. First, they chose not to trust God, even though they had an intimate relationship with him, choosing instead to listen to the voice of a stranger. Second, though they were unsuccessful, they declared their independence from God by trying to become like gods themselves.<\/p>\nBecause we all make that same choice for ourselves, no one is truly innocent (see Ps 14:2-3; Rom 3:9-23). As a result, we are all subject to the consequences of sin in the world. We may die as the result of another’s sin, carelessness, or ignorance, or as a result of our own. Because one person drives under the influence of alcohol, someone else might die on the highway. Because one person wants to maximize profits, others can suffer in wretched conditions. And because Achan sinned, others in Israel died at Ai.<\/p>\nNone of this is “fair.” However, God promises to bring perfect justice in his own time. God’s justice will be mediated through his grace and mercy, brought to us through Jesus’ death in our place (see Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:24-27; Exod 20:5; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Kgs 14:6; 21:10-15; Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:16-37; Jer 31:29-30; Ezek 18:20; Dan 9:4-19; Matt 23:29-36; John 9:1-3; Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","summary_en":"Community Responsibility: Achan’s Sin Should an entire community be held responsible for the sins of a smaller few? Why did so many of Israel’s soldiers die at Ai because of Achan’s sin (Josh 7)? Why did the Israelites stone Achan’s family along with him? A significant part of the answer to these questions comes by understanding the concept of community responsibility. If Achan’s family knew of his theft, they were accomplices and shared Achan’s guilt. A community becomes responsible for sin ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"31":[{"id":41906,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jeremiah","title_en":"Jeremiah","content_ro":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\nJeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\nJeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\nJeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\nJeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\nNebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\nJeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\nJeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\nJeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\nJeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\nJeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\nNebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\nJeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","summary_en":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":41931,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Baruch","title_en":"Baruch","content_ro":"<h3>Baruch<\/h3>\nBaruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah.<\/p>\nIn the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC<\/span>), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (36:4) and read the words to the people (36:8-19). When the message reached Jehoiakim, he destroyed the scroll and called for Baruch’s and Jeremiah’s arrest (36:21-26). But they had gone into hiding, where Jeremiah repeated the prophecies and Baruch again wrote them down (36:27-32).<\/p>\nAt about that time, God gave Baruch a personal message through Jeremiah (Jer 45). Baruch might have been troubled about the loss of career prospects or personal comfort resulting from his association with Jeremiah. God comforted Baruch with an assurance of protection and instructed him not to seek “great things” for himself, because the promise of Judah’s destruction was certain.<\/p>\nWhen Jerusalem was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span>, Baruch stayed with Jeremiah and the others who remained in the land. Apparently Baruch was viewed as influential: The rebel leaders wanted to go to Egypt and when Jeremiah warned them against it (Jer 42), they accused Baruch of persuading Jeremiah. The leaders did not listen but took Baruch and Jeremiah with them to Egypt (43:1-7). We do not know how, when, or where Baruch died. One tradition records that he was taken to Babylon when Nebuchadnezzar invaded Egypt. It is also possible that Baruch died in Egypt.<\/p>\nAlthough God warned Baruch not to pursue great things, and he seemed to die without honor, his legacy might in fact be the book of Jeremiah, which he clearly had a hand in producing—a book that warns of judgment and eloquently expresses the hope for the new covenant (31:31-34).<\/p>\nIn 1975, a clay impression (bulla<\/em>) formed from a scribe’s seal was found with the words “[Belonging to] Berechiahu, son of Neriahu, the scribe” (Berechiahu<\/em> is the long form of the name Baruch<\/em>). Each scribe and government official had a unique seal bearing his name, with which he would seal documents to verify their authenticity—the ancient equivalent of a signature. The seal would be pressed into soft clay to form an impression (bulla<\/em>), which was affixed to the signed document. The bulla<\/em> of Baruch dates from the time of Jeremiah and Baruch; other bullae<\/em> that were found include the names of several other individuals in Jeremiah (e.g., “Gemariah, son of Shaphan,” 36:10-12, 25; Ishmael, 40:7–41:10). Most scholars have concluded that the Baruch bulla<\/em> was in fact formed by the seal of Baruch, Jeremiah’s scribe. These bullae,<\/em> seemingly insignificant artifacts of an ancient civilization, provide independent historical verification of some of the details of Jeremiah’s account.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 32:9-15; 36:1-21, 26-32; 43:1-7; 45:1-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baruch<\/h3>\nBaruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah.<\/p>\nIn the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC<\/span>), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (36:4) and read the words to the people (36:8-19). When the message reached Jehoiakim, he destroyed the scroll and called for Baruch’s and Jeremiah’s arrest (36:21-26). But they had gone into hiding, where Jeremiah repeated the prophecies and Baruch again wrote them down (36:27-32).<\/p>\nAt about that time, God gave Baruch a personal message through Jeremiah (Jer 45). Baruch might have been troubled about the loss of career prospects or personal comfort resulting from his association with Jeremiah. God comforted Baruch with an assurance of protection and instructed him not to seek “great things” for himself, because the promise of Judah’s destruction was certain.<\/p>\nWhen Jerusalem was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span>, Baruch stayed with Jeremiah and the others who remained in the land. Apparently Baruch was viewed as influential: The rebel leaders wanted to go to Egypt and when Jeremiah warned them against it (Jer 42), they accused Baruch of persuading Jeremiah. The leaders did not listen but took Baruch and Jeremiah with them to Egypt (43:1-7). We do not know how, when, or where Baruch died. One tradition records that he was taken to Babylon when Nebuchadnezzar invaded Egypt. It is also possible that Baruch died in Egypt.<\/p>\nAlthough God warned Baruch not to pursue great things, and he seemed to die without honor, his legacy might in fact be the book of Jeremiah, which he clearly had a hand in producing—a book that warns of judgment and eloquently expresses the hope for the new covenant (31:31-34).<\/p>\nIn 1975, a clay impression (bulla<\/em>) formed from a scribe’s seal was found with the words “[Belonging to] Berechiahu, son of Neriahu, the scribe” (Berechiahu<\/em> is the long form of the name Baruch<\/em>). Each scribe and government official had a unique seal bearing his name, with which he would seal documents to verify their authenticity—the ancient equivalent of a signature. The seal would be pressed into soft clay to form an impression (bulla<\/em>), which was affixed to the signed document. The bulla<\/em> of Baruch dates from the time of Jeremiah and Baruch; other bullae<\/em> that were found include the names of several other individuals in Jeremiah (e.g., “Gemariah, son of Shaphan,” 36:10-12, 25; Ishmael, 40:7–41:10). Most scholars have concluded that the Baruch bulla<\/em> was in fact formed by the seal of Baruch, Jeremiah’s scribe. These bullae,<\/em> seemingly insignificant artifacts of an ancient civilization, provide independent historical verification of some of the details of Jeremiah’s account.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 32:9-15; 36:1-21, 26-32; 43:1-7; 45:1-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baruch Baruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah. In the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (3...","summary_en":"Baruch Baruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah. In the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (3...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69532,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jeremiah","title_en":"Jeremiah","content_ro":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\nJeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\nJeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\nJeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\nJeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\nNebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\nJeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\nJeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\nJeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\nJeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\nJeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\nNebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\nJeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","summary_en":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69557,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Baruch","title_en":"Baruch","content_ro":"<h3>Baruch<\/h3>\nBaruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah.<\/p>\nIn the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC<\/span>), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (36:4) and read the words to the people (36:8-19). When the message reached Jehoiakim, he destroyed the scroll and called for Baruch’s and Jeremiah’s arrest (36:21-26). But they had gone into hiding, where Jeremiah repeated the prophecies and Baruch again wrote them down (36:27-32).<\/p>\nAt about that time, God gave Baruch a personal message through Jeremiah (Jer 45). Baruch might have been troubled about the loss of career prospects or personal comfort resulting from his association with Jeremiah. God comforted Baruch with an assurance of protection and instructed him not to seek “great things” for himself, because the promise of Judah’s destruction was certain.<\/p>\nWhen Jerusalem was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span>, Baruch stayed with Jeremiah and the others who remained in the land. Apparently Baruch was viewed as influential: The rebel leaders wanted to go to Egypt and when Jeremiah warned them against it (Jer 42), they accused Baruch of persuading Jeremiah. The leaders did not listen but took Baruch and Jeremiah with them to Egypt (43:1-7). We do not know how, when, or where Baruch died. One tradition records that he was taken to Babylon when Nebuchadnezzar invaded Egypt. It is also possible that Baruch died in Egypt.<\/p>\nAlthough God warned Baruch not to pursue great things, and he seemed to die without honor, his legacy might in fact be the book of Jeremiah, which he clearly had a hand in producing—a book that warns of judgment and eloquently expresses the hope for the new covenant (31:31-34).<\/p>\nIn 1975, a clay impression (bulla<\/em>) formed from a scribe’s seal was found with the words “[Belonging to] Berechiahu, son of Neriahu, the scribe” (Berechiahu<\/em> is the long form of the name Baruch<\/em>). Each scribe and government official had a unique seal bearing his name, with which he would seal documents to verify their authenticity—the ancient equivalent of a signature. The seal would be pressed into soft clay to form an impression (bulla<\/em>), which was affixed to the signed document. The bulla<\/em> of Baruch dates from the time of Jeremiah and Baruch; other bullae<\/em> that were found include the names of several other individuals in Jeremiah (e.g., “Gemariah, son of Shaphan,” 36:10-12, 25; Ishmael, 40:7–41:10). Most scholars have concluded that the Baruch bulla<\/em> was in fact formed by the seal of Baruch, Jeremiah’s scribe. These bullae,<\/em> seemingly insignificant artifacts of an ancient civilization, provide independent historical verification of some of the details of Jeremiah’s account.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 32:9-15; 36:1-21, 26-32; 43:1-7; 45:1-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baruch<\/h3>\nBaruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah.<\/p>\nIn the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC<\/span>), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (36:4) and read the words to the people (36:8-19). When the message reached Jehoiakim, he destroyed the scroll and called for Baruch’s and Jeremiah’s arrest (36:21-26). But they had gone into hiding, where Jeremiah repeated the prophecies and Baruch again wrote them down (36:27-32).<\/p>\nAt about that time, God gave Baruch a personal message through Jeremiah (Jer 45). Baruch might have been troubled about the loss of career prospects or personal comfort resulting from his association with Jeremiah. God comforted Baruch with an assurance of protection and instructed him not to seek “great things” for himself, because the promise of Judah’s destruction was certain.<\/p>\nWhen Jerusalem was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span>, Baruch stayed with Jeremiah and the others who remained in the land. Apparently Baruch was viewed as influential: The rebel leaders wanted to go to Egypt and when Jeremiah warned them against it (Jer 42), they accused Baruch of persuading Jeremiah. The leaders did not listen but took Baruch and Jeremiah with them to Egypt (43:1-7). We do not know how, when, or where Baruch died. One tradition records that he was taken to Babylon when Nebuchadnezzar invaded Egypt. It is also possible that Baruch died in Egypt.<\/p>\nAlthough God warned Baruch not to pursue great things, and he seemed to die without honor, his legacy might in fact be the book of Jeremiah, which he clearly had a hand in producing—a book that warns of judgment and eloquently expresses the hope for the new covenant (31:31-34).<\/p>\nIn 1975, a clay impression (bulla<\/em>) formed from a scribe’s seal was found with the words “[Belonging to] Berechiahu, son of Neriahu, the scribe” (Berechiahu<\/em> is the long form of the name Baruch<\/em>). Each scribe and government official had a unique seal bearing his name, with which he would seal documents to verify their authenticity—the ancient equivalent of a signature. The seal would be pressed into soft clay to form an impression (bulla<\/em>), which was affixed to the signed document. The bulla<\/em> of Baruch dates from the time of Jeremiah and Baruch; other bullae<\/em> that were found include the names of several other individuals in Jeremiah (e.g., “Gemariah, son of Shaphan,” 36:10-12, 25; Ishmael, 40:7–41:10). Most scholars have concluded that the Baruch bulla<\/em> was in fact formed by the seal of Baruch, Jeremiah’s scribe. These bullae,<\/em> seemingly insignificant artifacts of an ancient civilization, provide independent historical verification of some of the details of Jeremiah’s account.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 32:9-15; 36:1-21, 26-32; 43:1-7; 45:1-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baruch Baruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah. In the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (3...","summary_en":"Baruch Baruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah. In the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (3...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97158,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jeremiah","title_en":"Jeremiah","content_ro":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\nJeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\nJeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\nJeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\nJeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\nNebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\nJeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\nJeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\nJeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\nJeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\nJeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\nNebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\nJeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","summary_en":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97183,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Baruch","title_en":"Baruch","content_ro":"<h3>Baruch<\/h3>\nBaruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah.<\/p>\nIn the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC<\/span>), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (36:4) and read the words to the people (36:8-19). When the message reached Jehoiakim, he destroyed the scroll and called for Baruch’s and Jeremiah’s arrest (36:21-26). But they had gone into hiding, where Jeremiah repeated the prophecies and Baruch again wrote them down (36:27-32).<\/p>\nAt about that time, God gave Baruch a personal message through Jeremiah (Jer 45). Baruch might have been troubled about the loss of career prospects or personal comfort resulting from his association with Jeremiah. God comforted Baruch with an assurance of protection and instructed him not to seek “great things” for himself, because the promise of Judah’s destruction was certain.<\/p>\nWhen Jerusalem was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span>, Baruch stayed with Jeremiah and the others who remained in the land. Apparently Baruch was viewed as influential: The rebel leaders wanted to go to Egypt and when Jeremiah warned them against it (Jer 42), they accused Baruch of persuading Jeremiah. The leaders did not listen but took Baruch and Jeremiah with them to Egypt (43:1-7). We do not know how, when, or where Baruch died. One tradition records that he was taken to Babylon when Nebuchadnezzar invaded Egypt. It is also possible that Baruch died in Egypt.<\/p>\nAlthough God warned Baruch not to pursue great things, and he seemed to die without honor, his legacy might in fact be the book of Jeremiah, which he clearly had a hand in producing—a book that warns of judgment and eloquently expresses the hope for the new covenant (31:31-34).<\/p>\nIn 1975, a clay impression (bulla<\/em>) formed from a scribe’s seal was found with the words “[Belonging to] Berechiahu, son of Neriahu, the scribe” (Berechiahu<\/em> is the long form of the name Baruch<\/em>). Each scribe and government official had a unique seal bearing his name, with which he would seal documents to verify their authenticity—the ancient equivalent of a signature. The seal would be pressed into soft clay to form an impression (bulla<\/em>), which was affixed to the signed document. The bulla<\/em> of Baruch dates from the time of Jeremiah and Baruch; other bullae<\/em> that were found include the names of several other individuals in Jeremiah (e.g., “Gemariah, son of Shaphan,” 36:10-12, 25; Ishmael, 40:7–41:10). Most scholars have concluded that the Baruch bulla<\/em> was in fact formed by the seal of Baruch, Jeremiah’s scribe. These bullae,<\/em> seemingly insignificant artifacts of an ancient civilization, provide independent historical verification of some of the details of Jeremiah’s account.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 32:9-15; 36:1-21, 26-32; 43:1-7; 45:1-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baruch<\/h3>\nBaruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah.<\/p>\nIn the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC<\/span>), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (36:4) and read the words to the people (36:8-19). When the message reached Jehoiakim, he destroyed the scroll and called for Baruch’s and Jeremiah’s arrest (36:21-26). But they had gone into hiding, where Jeremiah repeated the prophecies and Baruch again wrote them down (36:27-32).<\/p>\nAt about that time, God gave Baruch a personal message through Jeremiah (Jer 45). Baruch might have been troubled about the loss of career prospects or personal comfort resulting from his association with Jeremiah. God comforted Baruch with an assurance of protection and instructed him not to seek “great things” for himself, because the promise of Judah’s destruction was certain.<\/p>\nWhen Jerusalem was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span>, Baruch stayed with Jeremiah and the others who remained in the land. Apparently Baruch was viewed as influential: The rebel leaders wanted to go to Egypt and when Jeremiah warned them against it (Jer 42), they accused Baruch of persuading Jeremiah. The leaders did not listen but took Baruch and Jeremiah with them to Egypt (43:1-7). We do not know how, when, or where Baruch died. One tradition records that he was taken to Babylon when Nebuchadnezzar invaded Egypt. It is also possible that Baruch died in Egypt.<\/p>\nAlthough God warned Baruch not to pursue great things, and he seemed to die without honor, his legacy might in fact be the book of Jeremiah, which he clearly had a hand in producing—a book that warns of judgment and eloquently expresses the hope for the new covenant (31:31-34).<\/p>\nIn 1975, a clay impression (bulla<\/em>) formed from a scribe’s seal was found with the words “[Belonging to] Berechiahu, son of Neriahu, the scribe” (Berechiahu<\/em> is the long form of the name Baruch<\/em>). Each scribe and government official had a unique seal bearing his name, with which he would seal documents to verify their authenticity—the ancient equivalent of a signature. The seal would be pressed into soft clay to form an impression (bulla<\/em>), which was affixed to the signed document. The bulla<\/em> of Baruch dates from the time of Jeremiah and Baruch; other bullae<\/em> that were found include the names of several other individuals in Jeremiah (e.g., “Gemariah, son of Shaphan,” 36:10-12, 25; Ishmael, 40:7–41:10). Most scholars have concluded that the Baruch bulla<\/em> was in fact formed by the seal of Baruch, Jeremiah’s scribe. These bullae,<\/em> seemingly insignificant artifacts of an ancient civilization, provide independent historical verification of some of the details of Jeremiah’s account.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 32:9-15; 36:1-21, 26-32; 43:1-7; 45:1-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baruch Baruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah. In the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (3...","summary_en":"Baruch Baruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah. In the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (3...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124784,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jeremiah","title_en":"Jeremiah","content_ro":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\nJeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\nJeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\nJeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\nJeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\nNebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\nJeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\nJeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\nJeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\nJeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\nJeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\nNebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\nJeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","summary_en":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124809,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Baruch","title_en":"Baruch","content_ro":"<h3>Baruch<\/h3>\nBaruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah.<\/p>\nIn the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC<\/span>), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (36:4) and read the words to the people (36:8-19). When the message reached Jehoiakim, he destroyed the scroll and called for Baruch’s and Jeremiah’s arrest (36:21-26). But they had gone into hiding, where Jeremiah repeated the prophecies and Baruch again wrote them down (36:27-32).<\/p>\nAt about that time, God gave Baruch a personal message through Jeremiah (Jer 45). Baruch might have been troubled about the loss of career prospects or personal comfort resulting from his association with Jeremiah. God comforted Baruch with an assurance of protection and instructed him not to seek “great things” for himself, because the promise of Judah’s destruction was certain.<\/p>\nWhen Jerusalem was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span>, Baruch stayed with Jeremiah and the others who remained in the land. Apparently Baruch was viewed as influential: The rebel leaders wanted to go to Egypt and when Jeremiah warned them against it (Jer 42), they accused Baruch of persuading Jeremiah. The leaders did not listen but took Baruch and Jeremiah with them to Egypt (43:1-7). We do not know how, when, or where Baruch died. One tradition records that he was taken to Babylon when Nebuchadnezzar invaded Egypt. It is also possible that Baruch died in Egypt.<\/p>\nAlthough God warned Baruch not to pursue great things, and he seemed to die without honor, his legacy might in fact be the book of Jeremiah, which he clearly had a hand in producing—a book that warns of judgment and eloquently expresses the hope for the new covenant (31:31-34).<\/p>\nIn 1975, a clay impression (bulla<\/em>) formed from a scribe’s seal was found with the words “[Belonging to] Berechiahu, son of Neriahu, the scribe” (Berechiahu<\/em> is the long form of the name Baruch<\/em>). Each scribe and government official had a unique seal bearing his name, with which he would seal documents to verify their authenticity—the ancient equivalent of a signature. The seal would be pressed into soft clay to form an impression (bulla<\/em>), which was affixed to the signed document. The bulla<\/em> of Baruch dates from the time of Jeremiah and Baruch; other bullae<\/em> that were found include the names of several other individuals in Jeremiah (e.g., “Gemariah, son of Shaphan,” 36:10-12, 25; Ishmael, 40:7–41:10). Most scholars have concluded that the Baruch bulla<\/em> was in fact formed by the seal of Baruch, Jeremiah’s scribe. These bullae,<\/em> seemingly insignificant artifacts of an ancient civilization, provide independent historical verification of some of the details of Jeremiah’s account.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 32:9-15; 36:1-21, 26-32; 43:1-7; 45:1-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Baruch<\/h3>\nBaruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah.<\/p>\nIn the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC<\/span>), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (36:4) and read the words to the people (36:8-19). When the message reached Jehoiakim, he destroyed the scroll and called for Baruch’s and Jeremiah’s arrest (36:21-26). But they had gone into hiding, where Jeremiah repeated the prophecies and Baruch again wrote them down (36:27-32).<\/p>\nAt about that time, God gave Baruch a personal message through Jeremiah (Jer 45). Baruch might have been troubled about the loss of career prospects or personal comfort resulting from his association with Jeremiah. God comforted Baruch with an assurance of protection and instructed him not to seek “great things” for himself, because the promise of Judah’s destruction was certain.<\/p>\nWhen Jerusalem was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span>, Baruch stayed with Jeremiah and the others who remained in the land. Apparently Baruch was viewed as influential: The rebel leaders wanted to go to Egypt and when Jeremiah warned them against it (Jer 42), they accused Baruch of persuading Jeremiah. The leaders did not listen but took Baruch and Jeremiah with them to Egypt (43:1-7). We do not know how, when, or where Baruch died. One tradition records that he was taken to Babylon when Nebuchadnezzar invaded Egypt. It is also possible that Baruch died in Egypt.<\/p>\nAlthough God warned Baruch not to pursue great things, and he seemed to die without honor, his legacy might in fact be the book of Jeremiah, which he clearly had a hand in producing—a book that warns of judgment and eloquently expresses the hope for the new covenant (31:31-34).<\/p>\nIn 1975, a clay impression (bulla<\/em>) formed from a scribe’s seal was found with the words “[Belonging to] Berechiahu, son of Neriahu, the scribe” (Berechiahu<\/em> is the long form of the name Baruch<\/em>). Each scribe and government official had a unique seal bearing his name, with which he would seal documents to verify their authenticity—the ancient equivalent of a signature. The seal would be pressed into soft clay to form an impression (bulla<\/em>), which was affixed to the signed document. The bulla<\/em> of Baruch dates from the time of Jeremiah and Baruch; other bullae<\/em> that were found include the names of several other individuals in Jeremiah (e.g., “Gemariah, son of Shaphan,” 36:10-12, 25; Ishmael, 40:7–41:10). Most scholars have concluded that the Baruch bulla<\/em> was in fact formed by the seal of Baruch, Jeremiah’s scribe. These bullae,<\/em> seemingly insignificant artifacts of an ancient civilization, provide independent historical verification of some of the details of Jeremiah’s account.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 32:9-15; 36:1-21, 26-32; 43:1-7; 45:1-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Baruch Baruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah. In the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (3...","summary_en":"Baruch Baruch the son of Neriah was a royal scribe in Jerusalem who served as secretary for Jeremiah the prophet. His brother Seraiah was a “staff officer” in Zedekiah’s administration (Jer 51:59-64). Baruch’s family evidently ranked highly in the administration of Judah. In the fourth year of King Jehoiakim of Judah (605 BC), God instructed Jeremiah to record the messages he had given to Israel, Judah, and the other nations (36:1-3). Jeremiah sent for Baruch, who wrote the prophecies down (3...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":2569,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and the Bible*, Archaeology","title_en":"and the Bible*, Archaeology","content_ro":"<h3>ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE*<\/h3>\nSimply defined, archaeology is the science that recovers and studies the relics of human antiquity. Biblical archaeology is concerned with the remains scattered across the Near East. Some lie buried at different levels in mounds; others survive as ruins or weathered monuments to past grandeur. Many of the artifacts bear inscriptions of sorts in a variety of ancient languages, some of which still need much study to be understood properly. Other artifacts comprise the material remains of everyday life; broken pottery bowls, charred timbers, trinkets, toys, ornaments, occasional fragments of cloth, rusted weapons, perhaps only the imprint of a woven mat. All must be interpreted carefully in the light of what is known about the period of history from which the objects have been recovered.<\/p>\nMany outstanding archaeological discoveries have been entirely accidental. At Ras Shamra in Syria, a peasant’s plow struck a tomb that led to the discovery of the ancient site of Ugarit. A Bedouin in search of a lost goat discovered the cave at Qumran that contained the Dead Sea Scrolls. In 1887 an Egyptian woman found the Amarna tablets while seeking decomposed bricks for use as fertilizer. In 1945 Egyptians hunting bird manure in caves near Nag Hammadi discovered important Coptic Gnostic manuscripts. Such chance finds, however, are no substitute for systematic surveys.<\/p>\nIn modern archaeology potential sites are surveyed carefully, generally photographed from the air, and tested for metals and other underground anomalies by the use of complex electronic equipment. Recovered artifacts are dated according to the level where they occurred in the site and by other methods, including radiocarbon dating. The purpose is to present a chronologically accurate picture of the artifacts and also of the site itself.<\/p>\nThe archaeologist and the Near Eastern scholar look at this testimony to ancient life in the realization that they are dealing with factual, objective data. Although there is obviously room for some speculation or difference of opinion, the objects being handled are silent but nevertheless real witnesses to people and events of the past. The relics, therefore, need to be understood in their own right as evidence and must not be manipulated to suit the fancies of some speculative interpretation of history, culture, or religion. Near Eastern archaeology is able to help us understand Scripture by providing objective background data. If, for example, an artifact containing pictographic or other forms of writing can be dated to around 3000 BC<\/span>, that alone tells us that written communications in the locality date back to at least that period. The antiquity of writing is now known to be such that all the early authors of OT material could easily have composed and written down all the narratives credited to them. Thus it is no longer necessary to suppose that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) on the ground that writing had not been invented in his day. In fact, archaeological discoveries have shown that Moses could, and probably did, write in Egyptian hieroglyphics, Babylonian cuneiform, and several Canaanite dialects (of which biblical Hebrew is one). Any theory of Pentateuchal composition that ignores such factual information is obviously wrong in a fundamentally important area.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Archaeology and Daily Life<\/p>\n• Archaeology and Religion<\/p>\n• Archaeology and Warfare<\/p>\n• Archaeology and Literature<\/p>\n• Archaeology and Language<\/p>\nArchaeology and Daily Life<\/p>\nThe kind of housing in which the ancients lived has been revealed from excavations at many Near Eastern sites. Neolithic (late Stone Age) dwellings were often simple “wattle-huts” of interwoven sticks, though some showed evidence of artistic interior decoration. The elegant middle-class home at Ur in the time of Abram was attractive even by modern standards. The magnificence of ancient palaces at such sites as Knossos, Persepolis, Mari, and Qantir is abundantly evident even from the ruins. Weaving is now known to be one of the oldest human crafts; the two types of knots used today in making oriental rugs originated in Mesopotamia in the remote past. Of similar antiquity was the manufacture of pottery, glazed and unglazed, some plain and some decorated.<\/p>\nObscure social customs in Scripture have been illustrated by archaeological discoveries. Abram’s procreation of a child by Hagar, his wife’s servant, was in conformity with local customs at Nuzi and was not regarded as immoral. The adoption of Eliezer by Abram (Gn 15:2-4) is clarified by texts from Nuzi that permitted childless couples to adopt sons who, in return for certain duties to the parents, would inherit the family estate. Such children had the inheritance rights of the firstborn, but their rights could be modified if the adopting parents subsequently had their own children. Texts from Nuzi, Ugarit, and Alalakh show that heads of families could disregard the natural order and choose any one of the sons to inherit firstborn rights (cf. Gn 48:13-22; 49:3-4). Nuzi tablets indicate that such rights could be traded between various members of the family, which accounts for the transaction between Esau and Jacob (Gn 25:31-34).<\/p>\nWork of all kinds in the biblical period has been illustrated from many sources. The Beni Hasan tableau (1900 BC<\/span>) shows traveling Semites bringing goods to Egypt. On one of the animals is a set of portable bellows, suggesting that the travelers may have been metalworkers. Other trades and occupations illustrated from monuments and paintings include hunting, fishing, brick making, various types of agricultural work, pottery making, and other domestic crafts. Such sources also provide valuable information about the way the ancients dressed. Men pictured on the Beni Hasan tableau were bearded and wore short skirts and sandals. Women had long, multicolored dresses fastened at the shoulder with a clasp. They wore shoes and kept their flowing hair in place by means of bands. Another Egyptian painting, dated 500 years later and showing Semites bringing gifts to the pharaoh, indicates that clothing styles had barely changed at all. These illustrations come from lands other than Palestine; the Israelites were forbidden to make representations of human beings or God.<\/p>\nThe most common traces of everyday life are potsherds, broken pottery pieces that were discarded in great quantities in settled areas and that can still be found today. Such fragments were often used as materials on which short messages were written, as illustrated by an important group of letters dating from the time of the prophet Jeremiah. The “Lachish letters” were actually military dispatches written in 587 BC<\/span> from an outpost north of Lachish to one of the officers defending Lachish itself. Centuries later in NT times potsherds were still popular as writing materials because they were more durable than Egyptian papyrus and more convenient than waxed writing boards. Rectangular wooden palettes with a slot for the rush pens and rounded hollows for the little tablets of red and black ink have been found in Egypt. Remains of some of the ink actually used in writing the Dead Sea Scrolls have been recovered from the settlement at Qumran.<\/p>\nIn antiquity, various games were played by children and adults alike. From a tomb at Beni Hasan (c. 2000 BC<\/span>) came a painting of pigtailed Egyptian girls keeping several balls up in the air at once. A relief in a temple at Thebes showed Ramses III playing draughts (checkers) with a concubine. Egyptian children of a later period played a game using pebbles that was perhaps the ancestor of backgammon. From Megiddo came an ivory gaming board with holes, presumably for pegs (c. 1200 BC<\/span>). Children’s toys recovered from Near Eastern sites include whistles, leather-covered balls, model chariots, and animals on wheels, showing that tastes have changed very little over the ages. Adult sports such as wrestling, archery, and running were depicted in Egyptian tomb paintings.<\/p>\nThe embalming of Jacob and Joseph (Gn 50:2-3, 26) represented a social custom of long standing in Egypt and is thoroughly consistent with the background of the narrative. Jacob was buried in the cave of Machpelah with Sarah, Abraham, and others; although the site is well known, it cannot be excavated because it is venerated by the Arabs as the sacred resting place of their ancestor Abraham.<\/p>\nAn inscription associated with an ancient Hebrew burial site was found in the Russian Museum on the Mt of Olives in 1931. At some point it had been removed from the grave site. It reads, “Hither were brought the bones of Uzziah king of Judah—do not open.” The inscription came from Christ’s time, suggesting that the original tomb of the great ruler had been found during excavations in Jerusalem and that the remains had been transferred to another site. Archaeologists have shown that the kind of stone door covering the entrance to Christ’s tomb was in fashion chiefly from about 100 BC<\/span> to about AD<\/span> 100, which is consistent with the Gospel records.<\/p>\nArchaeology and Religion<\/p>\nArchaeological excavations have done much to indicate the nature of biblical religion and worship. Long before Abram left Ur at the command of the one true God, pagan Mesopotamian peoples worshiped individual gods and recognized them as celestial deities or “sky gods.” There is thus nothing inherently impossible or improbable about the relationship of the Hebrew patriarchs to the God whom they served and venerated. The worship of heathen deities in portable shrines has been illustrated from a relief of Ramses II, which showed the divine tent in the middle of the Egyptian encampment. In addition, seventhcentury BC Phoenician writings referred to a portable shrine pulled by oxen. The Israelite wilderness tabernacle thus fits properly into that kind of background and is not of comparatively late origin, as was once supposed.<\/p>\nThe tradition of singers participating in preexilic worship has been verified by archaeological discoveries indicating that for centuries the Palestinians had been noted for their musical abilities. Tablets from Ras Shamra (Ugarit) are full of religious poetry, some of which contains phrases similar to expressions in the Hebrew psalms. Solomon’s temple was built by Phoenician (Canaanite) workmen according to a ground plan (cf. 1 Kgs 6) similar to that of the eighth-century BC<\/span> chapel found at Tel Tainat in Syria. The Wailing Wall in Jerusalem is thought to contain stones going back to Nehemiah’s time, but no traces of Solomon’s foundations have yet been uncovered in the city. Pieces of masonry from Herod’s temple, demolished in AD<\/span> 70, have come to light and furnish interesting factual information about the appearance of contemporary pillars and supporting structures. Though there were supposedly many synagogues in Palestine in Christ’s time, few remains of any significance have survived.<\/p>\nArchaeology and Warfare<\/p>\nUnderstanding of ancient warfare, a prominent biblical theme, has been assisted greatly by the work of archaeologists. Ancient Near Eastern peoples regarded war as conflict between the gods of the opposing nations. Military service was therefore regarded as a sacred calling, and soldiers were members of an honored profession. In his capacity as Lord of hosts, God was the commander in chief of the Hebrew army; he could order a city to be given up to the “ban,” that is, to complete destruction (cf. Jos 6:17, 24). War was waged according to well-understood rules. An enemy threatening the safety of a city would normally send its inhabitants a demand for surrender. If it was accepted, all lives were spared, though property would be plundered. If the demand was rejected, the besieged city dwellers knew that if their defenses were breached, they might all be killed. Frontal assaults, spies, ambushes, and armed patrols were all used in warfare. Sometimes battles were decided by the outcome of combat between champions (1 Sm 17:38-54).<\/p>\nAncient armor was pictured widely on reliefs and monuments, supplementing the artifacts that have been recovered. A magnificent golden helmet from Ur is an outstanding example of Sumerian military equipment, contrasting with the much smaller Hittite helmets depicted on a tomb wall at Karnak. Metal helmets (cf. 1 Sm 17:38) were worn initially only by leaders in the Israelite armies, but by Seleucid times all Hebrew soldiers were issued bronze helmets (1 Macc 6:35). Roman legionnaires commonly wore either leather or bronze helmets. The Hebrews used two kinds of shields: a large one protected the whole body and was designed for use by infantry; the other, smaller one was carried by archers (cf. 2 Chr 14:8). Such shields were generally of wood-and-leather construction, though occasionally made of bronze. Coats of scale armor (cf. Jer 46:4) were used in the Near East from at least the 15th century BC<\/span>, as indicated by the recovery of such scales from Alalakh and Ugarit. Swords and spears, a normal part of Hebrew weaponry, came in a variety of shapes and sizes, as illustrated on monuments and bas-reliefs. Furnaces used for manufacturing swords were found at Gerar; Bronze Age daggers have been recovered from Lachish and Megiddo. The compound Asiatic bow, made of wood, horn, and tendons attached to iron limbs, was the successor of the Semitic weapon depicted on the Beni Hasan tableau. Discovery of names inscribed on arrowheads dating between 1300 and 900 BC<\/span> seems to indicate the existence of companies of archers (cf. Is 21:17). Very little is said in the NT about contemporary military equipment.<\/p>\nArchaeology and Literature<\/p>\nMany types of biblical literature have been paralleled in counterparts discovered in the Near East. Excavators at Ras Shamra found poetic and prose tablets that contain grammatical and literary forms occurring in the Hebrew psalms. It is now incorrect to suppose that detailed law codes such as those in the Pentateuch were not compiled until after the time of Moses, because fragmentary Sumerian codes dating from about the 19th century BC<\/span> exhibit the same legislative tendencies. The code of the Babylonian ruler Hammurabi (18th century BC<\/span>), based on earlier Sumerian legislation, expanded the principles of justice into nearly 300 sections. Hammurabi’s code was an attempt to stabilize contemporary society on the basis of law and order. Its style is interesting; it commenced with a poetic prologue, followed by the prose legal section, and concluded with a prose epilogue. This three-part literary pattern also appears in the book of Job (prose-poetry-prose), as well as in more modern writings.<\/p>\nThe covenant structure of Exodus 20:1-17 and its fuller form in Deuteronomy have been examined in light of the literary structure of second-millennium BC<\/span> Hittite vassal treaties from Boghazkôy. The treaties were drawn up according to a standard pattern, the elements of which occur wholly or in part in the various OT covenantal passages (Ex 20:1-17; Lv 18:1-30; Dt 1:1–31:30; Jer 31:31-37).<\/p>\nWhat appear to be 11 Mesopotamian tablet forms in Genesis can be isolated by the recurrence of the phrase “these are the generations of” in the kjv<\/span> and some modern versions. The phrase and its accompanying material correspond to the colophon (notation about a publication, often found on the very last page of modern books) of undamaged Mesopotamian tablets. Genealogical material such as occurs in Genesis was also found on clay tablets from Nuzi. The terse style of the earlier Genesis historical accounts is reminiscent of Sumerian history writing.<\/p>\nHebrew wisdom literature such as Proverbs has been paralleled from Egypt by the “Instruction of Amenemope,” where Proverbs 22:17–24:22 in particular is close in content to the Egyptian material. Scholars have yet to decide if one depended on the other, or if both went back to an even earlier source that has not survived.<\/p>\nThe epistolary (letter) form was a common feature of the ancient world (2 Sm 11; 1 Kgs 21; 2 Kgs 5:10, 20; Ezr 4:6-7; Neh 2:7). Many collections of Egyptian papyri, such as the Zenon documents, consisted of letters. Among the Greeks the letter form dated back to Plato. His Seventh Letter<\/em> (c. 354 BC<\/span>) is interesting because it attempted to rebut contemporary misunderstandings of his teaching and personal behavior. Certain of the apostle Paul’s letters (Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, Thessalonians) also stand in that general tradition. Paul’s Letter to Philemon corresponds closely to papyrus letters from Egypt of a purely personal nature.<\/p>\nArchaeology and Language<\/p>\nRecovery of many ancient Near Eastern languages has done much to clarify our understanding of the OT. Expressions now known to be Sumerian and Akkadian occur not only in Genesis but elsewhere in the Scriptures. Thus in Genesis 1:1 the phrase “the heavens and the earth” is a Sumerian expression (an-ki)<\/em> meaning “universe”; the pair of antonyms (words opposite in meaning) expresses totality. Revelation 22:13 uses this literary device to express the same concept in three different ways.<\/p>\nUgaritic and Eblaic, both west Semitic dialects, are closely related to Hebrew and contain striking literary similarities. Reference to archaic Ugaritic expressions has made it possible to translate properly some obscure Hebrew poetic language that is now seen to have preserved genuine ancient Canaanite phraseology.<\/p>\nAramaic, another northwest Semitic language, was spoken in the third millennium BC<\/span>, and is represented in the OT principally by chapters in Ezra and Daniel. These were written in imperial Aramaic, as are the Elephantine papyri of the fifth and fourth centuries BC<\/span>. It is now known, on the basis of the Aramaic used, to be linguistically incorrect to assign a late date to either Ezra or Daniel.<\/p>\nThe NT was written in koine<\/span>,<\/em> or “common” Greek, the language of the Near East and the Roman Empire. NT common Greek differs from other Greek dialects in containing underlying Semitic expressions, which are frequently unrecognized and therefore mistranslated by the unwary.<\/p>\nFrom the foregoing it is evident that archaeological discoveries have done much to enlarge our knowledge of the ancient world. Even with the limited data at our disposal it is possible to see the men and women of Scripture as real persons, living mostly in times of stress and uncertainty but often enjoying a high degree of culture unmatched until modern times. We see such persons as they should be seen—not as mythical or legendary figures, but as true children of their age, grappling with life’s problems and catching periodically a vision of God as all powerful and all holy, guiding the destinies of individuals and nations and bringing his purposes to pass in history. Archaeology has shown that the Hebrews must never be studied separately from other ancient Near Eastern peoples but instead must be seen as one element of a vast cultural complex that included such diverse peoples as the Sumerians and the Aegeans.<\/p>\nSuch study must be pursued in a consistently objective fashion, arguing from relevant evidence to a proper understanding of biblical events and life. It is sometimes difficult to reconcile certain accepted interpretations of archaeological data and the evidence of Scripture. Such conflicts are few in number, however, and tend to diminish noticeably as new information is forthcoming. In principle the archaeologist has no particular interest in “proving the truth” of the Scriptures, and it is obviously impossible for a spade or a trowel to prove or disprove the spiritual revelations and assertions of Scripture. But it is fair to say that archaeology validates Hebrew history and explains many formerly obscure terms and traditions in both the OT and NT. It thus provides an authentic background for the prophecies culminating in Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE*<\/h3>\nSimply defined, archaeology is the science that recovers and studies the relics of human antiquity. Biblical archaeology is concerned with the remains scattered across the Near East. Some lie buried at different levels in mounds; others survive as ruins or weathered monuments to past grandeur. Many of the artifacts bear inscriptions of sorts in a variety of ancient languages, some of which still need much study to be understood properly. Other artifacts comprise the material remains of everyday life; broken pottery bowls, charred timbers, trinkets, toys, ornaments, occasional fragments of cloth, rusted weapons, perhaps only the imprint of a woven mat. All must be interpreted carefully in the light of what is known about the period of history from which the objects have been recovered.<\/p>\nMany outstanding archaeological discoveries have been entirely accidental. At Ras Shamra in Syria, a peasant’s plow struck a tomb that led to the discovery of the ancient site of Ugarit. A Bedouin in search of a lost goat discovered the cave at Qumran that contained the Dead Sea Scrolls. In 1887 an Egyptian woman found the Amarna tablets while seeking decomposed bricks for use as fertilizer. In 1945 Egyptians hunting bird manure in caves near Nag Hammadi discovered important Coptic Gnostic manuscripts. Such chance finds, however, are no substitute for systematic surveys.<\/p>\nIn modern archaeology potential sites are surveyed carefully, generally photographed from the air, and tested for metals and other underground anomalies by the use of complex electronic equipment. Recovered artifacts are dated according to the level where they occurred in the site and by other methods, including radiocarbon dating. The purpose is to present a chronologically accurate picture of the artifacts and also of the site itself.<\/p>\nThe archaeologist and the Near Eastern scholar look at this testimony to ancient life in the realization that they are dealing with factual, objective data. Although there is obviously room for some speculation or difference of opinion, the objects being handled are silent but nevertheless real witnesses to people and events of the past. The relics, therefore, need to be understood in their own right as evidence and must not be manipulated to suit the fancies of some speculative interpretation of history, culture, or religion. Near Eastern archaeology is able to help us understand Scripture by providing objective background data. If, for example, an artifact containing pictographic or other forms of writing can be dated to around 3000 BC<\/span>, that alone tells us that written communications in the locality date back to at least that period. The antiquity of writing is now known to be such that all the early authors of OT material could easily have composed and written down all the narratives credited to them. Thus it is no longer necessary to suppose that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) on the ground that writing had not been invented in his day. In fact, archaeological discoveries have shown that Moses could, and probably did, write in Egyptian hieroglyphics, Babylonian cuneiform, and several Canaanite dialects (of which biblical Hebrew is one). Any theory of Pentateuchal composition that ignores such factual information is obviously wrong in a fundamentally important area.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Archaeology and Daily Life<\/p>\n• Archaeology and Religion<\/p>\n• Archaeology and Warfare<\/p>\n• Archaeology and Literature<\/p>\n• Archaeology and Language<\/p>\nArchaeology and Daily Life<\/p>\nThe kind of housing in which the ancients lived has been revealed from excavations at many Near Eastern sites. Neolithic (late Stone Age) dwellings were often simple “wattle-huts” of interwoven sticks, though some showed evidence of artistic interior decoration. The elegant middle-class home at Ur in the time of Abram was attractive even by modern standards. The magnificence of ancient palaces at such sites as Knossos, Persepolis, Mari, and Qantir is abundantly evident even from the ruins. Weaving is now known to be one of the oldest human crafts; the two types of knots used today in making oriental rugs originated in Mesopotamia in the remote past. Of similar antiquity was the manufacture of pottery, glazed and unglazed, some plain and some decorated.<\/p>\nObscure social customs in Scripture have been illustrated by archaeological discoveries. Abram’s procreation of a child by Hagar, his wife’s servant, was in conformity with local customs at Nuzi and was not regarded as immoral. The adoption of Eliezer by Abram (Gn 15:2-4) is clarified by texts from Nuzi that permitted childless couples to adopt sons who, in return for certain duties to the parents, would inherit the family estate. Such children had the inheritance rights of the firstborn, but their rights could be modified if the adopting parents subsequently had their own children. Texts from Nuzi, Ugarit, and Alalakh show that heads of families could disregard the natural order and choose any one of the sons to inherit firstborn rights (cf. Gn 48:13-22; 49:3-4). Nuzi tablets indicate that such rights could be traded between various members of the family, which accounts for the transaction between Esau and Jacob (Gn 25:31-34).<\/p>\nWork of all kinds in the biblical period has been illustrated from many sources. The Beni Hasan tableau (1900 BC<\/span>) shows traveling Semites bringing goods to Egypt. On one of the animals is a set of portable bellows, suggesting that the travelers may have been metalworkers. Other trades and occupations illustrated from monuments and paintings include hunting, fishing, brick making, various types of agricultural work, pottery making, and other domestic crafts. Such sources also provide valuable information about the way the ancients dressed. Men pictured on the Beni Hasan tableau were bearded and wore short skirts and sandals. Women had long, multicolored dresses fastened at the shoulder with a clasp. They wore shoes and kept their flowing hair in place by means of bands. Another Egyptian painting, dated 500 years later and showing Semites bringing gifts to the pharaoh, indicates that clothing styles had barely changed at all. These illustrations come from lands other than Palestine; the Israelites were forbidden to make representations of human beings or God.<\/p>\nThe most common traces of everyday life are potsherds, broken pottery pieces that were discarded in great quantities in settled areas and that can still be found today. Such fragments were often used as materials on which short messages were written, as illustrated by an important group of letters dating from the time of the prophet Jeremiah. The “Lachish letters” were actually military dispatches written in 587 BC<\/span> from an outpost north of Lachish to one of the officers defending Lachish itself. Centuries later in NT times potsherds were still popular as writing materials because they were more durable than Egyptian papyrus and more convenient than waxed writing boards. Rectangular wooden palettes with a slot for the rush pens and rounded hollows for the little tablets of red and black ink have been found in Egypt. Remains of some of the ink actually used in writing the Dead Sea Scrolls have been recovered from the settlement at Qumran.<\/p>\nIn antiquity, various games were played by children and adults alike. From a tomb at Beni Hasan (c. 2000 BC<\/span>) came a painting of pigtailed Egyptian girls keeping several balls up in the air at once. A relief in a temple at Thebes showed Ramses III playing draughts (checkers) with a concubine. Egyptian children of a later period played a game using pebbles that was perhaps the ancestor of backgammon. From Megiddo came an ivory gaming board with holes, presumably for pegs (c. 1200 BC<\/span>). Children’s toys recovered from Near Eastern sites include whistles, leather-covered balls, model chariots, and animals on wheels, showing that tastes have changed very little over the ages. Adult sports such as wrestling, archery, and running were depicted in Egyptian tomb paintings.<\/p>\nThe embalming of Jacob and Joseph (Gn 50:2-3, 26) represented a social custom of long standing in Egypt and is thoroughly consistent with the background of the narrative. Jacob was buried in the cave of Machpelah with Sarah, Abraham, and others; although the site is well known, it cannot be excavated because it is venerated by the Arabs as the sacred resting place of their ancestor Abraham.<\/p>\nAn inscription associated with an ancient Hebrew burial site was found in the Russian Museum on the Mt of Olives in 1931. At some point it had been removed from the grave site. It reads, “Hither were brought the bones of Uzziah king of Judah—do not open.” The inscription came from Christ’s time, suggesting that the original tomb of the great ruler had been found during excavations in Jerusalem and that the remains had been transferred to another site. Archaeologists have shown that the kind of stone door covering the entrance to Christ’s tomb was in fashion chiefly from about 100 BC<\/span> to about AD<\/span> 100, which is consistent with the Gospel records.<\/p>\nArchaeology and Religion<\/p>\nArchaeological excavations have done much to indicate the nature of biblical religion and worship. Long before Abram left Ur at the command of the one true God, pagan Mesopotamian peoples worshiped individual gods and recognized them as celestial deities or “sky gods.” There is thus nothing inherently impossible or improbable about the relationship of the Hebrew patriarchs to the God whom they served and venerated. The worship of heathen deities in portable shrines has been illustrated from a relief of Ramses II, which showed the divine tent in the middle of the Egyptian encampment. In addition, seventhcentury BC Phoenician writings referred to a portable shrine pulled by oxen. The Israelite wilderness tabernacle thus fits properly into that kind of background and is not of comparatively late origin, as was once supposed.<\/p>\nThe tradition of singers participating in preexilic worship has been verified by archaeological discoveries indicating that for centuries the Palestinians had been noted for their musical abilities. Tablets from Ras Shamra (Ugarit) are full of religious poetry, some of which contains phrases similar to expressions in the Hebrew psalms. Solomon’s temple was built by Phoenician (Canaanite) workmen according to a ground plan (cf. 1 Kgs 6) similar to that of the eighth-century BC<\/span> chapel found at Tel Tainat in Syria. The Wailing Wall in Jerusalem is thought to contain stones going back to Nehemiah’s time, but no traces of Solomon’s foundations have yet been uncovered in the city. Pieces of masonry from Herod’s temple, demolished in AD<\/span> 70, have come to light and furnish interesting factual information about the appearance of contemporary pillars and supporting structures. Though there were supposedly many synagogues in Palestine in Christ’s time, few remains of any significance have survived.<\/p>\nArchaeology and Warfare<\/p>\nUnderstanding of ancient warfare, a prominent biblical theme, has been assisted greatly by the work of archaeologists. Ancient Near Eastern peoples regarded war as conflict between the gods of the opposing nations. Military service was therefore regarded as a sacred calling, and soldiers were members of an honored profession. In his capacity as Lord of hosts, God was the commander in chief of the Hebrew army; he could order a city to be given up to the “ban,” that is, to complete destruction (cf. Jos 6:17, 24). War was waged according to well-understood rules. An enemy threatening the safety of a city would normally send its inhabitants a demand for surrender. If it was accepted, all lives were spared, though property would be plundered. If the demand was rejected, the besieged city dwellers knew that if their defenses were breached, they might all be killed. Frontal assaults, spies, ambushes, and armed patrols were all used in warfare. Sometimes battles were decided by the outcome of combat between champions (1 Sm 17:38-54).<\/p>\nAncient armor was pictured widely on reliefs and monuments, supplementing the artifacts that have been recovered. A magnificent golden helmet from Ur is an outstanding example of Sumerian military equipment, contrasting with the much smaller Hittite helmets depicted on a tomb wall at Karnak. Metal helmets (cf. 1 Sm 17:38) were worn initially only by leaders in the Israelite armies, but by Seleucid times all Hebrew soldiers were issued bronze helmets (1 Macc 6:35). Roman legionnaires commonly wore either leather or bronze helmets. The Hebrews used two kinds of shields: a large one protected the whole body and was designed for use by infantry; the other, smaller one was carried by archers (cf. 2 Chr 14:8). Such shields were generally of wood-and-leather construction, though occasionally made of bronze. Coats of scale armor (cf. Jer 46:4) were used in the Near East from at least the 15th century BC<\/span>, as indicated by the recovery of such scales from Alalakh and Ugarit. Swords and spears, a normal part of Hebrew weaponry, came in a variety of shapes and sizes, as illustrated on monuments and bas-reliefs. Furnaces used for manufacturing swords were found at Gerar; Bronze Age daggers have been recovered from Lachish and Megiddo. The compound Asiatic bow, made of wood, horn, and tendons attached to iron limbs, was the successor of the Semitic weapon depicted on the Beni Hasan tableau. Discovery of names inscribed on arrowheads dating between 1300 and 900 BC<\/span> seems to indicate the existence of companies of archers (cf. Is 21:17). Very little is said in the NT about contemporary military equipment.<\/p>\nArchaeology and Literature<\/p>\nMany types of biblical literature have been paralleled in counterparts discovered in the Near East. Excavators at Ras Shamra found poetic and prose tablets that contain grammatical and literary forms occurring in the Hebrew psalms. It is now incorrect to suppose that detailed law codes such as those in the Pentateuch were not compiled until after the time of Moses, because fragmentary Sumerian codes dating from about the 19th century BC<\/span> exhibit the same legislative tendencies. The code of the Babylonian ruler Hammurabi (18th century BC<\/span>), based on earlier Sumerian legislation, expanded the principles of justice into nearly 300 sections. Hammurabi’s code was an attempt to stabilize contemporary society on the basis of law and order. Its style is interesting; it commenced with a poetic prologue, followed by the prose legal section, and concluded with a prose epilogue. This three-part literary pattern also appears in the book of Job (prose-poetry-prose), as well as in more modern writings.<\/p>\nThe covenant structure of Exodus 20:1-17 and its fuller form in Deuteronomy have been examined in light of the literary structure of second-millennium BC<\/span> Hittite vassal treaties from Boghazkôy. The treaties were drawn up according to a standard pattern, the elements of which occur wholly or in part in the various OT covenantal passages (Ex 20:1-17; Lv 18:1-30; Dt 1:1–31:30; Jer 31:31-37).<\/p>\nWhat appear to be 11 Mesopotamian tablet forms in Genesis can be isolated by the recurrence of the phrase “these are the generations of” in the kjv<\/span> and some modern versions. The phrase and its accompanying material correspond to the colophon (notation about a publication, often found on the very last page of modern books) of undamaged Mesopotamian tablets. Genealogical material such as occurs in Genesis was also found on clay tablets from Nuzi. The terse style of the earlier Genesis historical accounts is reminiscent of Sumerian history writing.<\/p>\nHebrew wisdom literature such as Proverbs has been paralleled from Egypt by the “Instruction of Amenemope,” where Proverbs 22:17–24:22 in particular is close in content to the Egyptian material. Scholars have yet to decide if one depended on the other, or if both went back to an even earlier source that has not survived.<\/p>\nThe epistolary (letter) form was a common feature of the ancient world (2 Sm 11; 1 Kgs 21; 2 Kgs 5:10, 20; Ezr 4:6-7; Neh 2:7). Many collections of Egyptian papyri, such as the Zenon documents, consisted of letters. Among the Greeks the letter form dated back to Plato. His Seventh Letter<\/em> (c. 354 BC<\/span>) is interesting because it attempted to rebut contemporary misunderstandings of his teaching and personal behavior. Certain of the apostle Paul’s letters (Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, Thessalonians) also stand in that general tradition. Paul’s Letter to Philemon corresponds closely to papyrus letters from Egypt of a purely personal nature.<\/p>\nArchaeology and Language<\/p>\nRecovery of many ancient Near Eastern languages has done much to clarify our understanding of the OT. Expressions now known to be Sumerian and Akkadian occur not only in Genesis but elsewhere in the Scriptures. Thus in Genesis 1:1 the phrase “the heavens and the earth” is a Sumerian expression (an-ki)<\/em> meaning “universe”; the pair of antonyms (words opposite in meaning) expresses totality. Revelation 22:13 uses this literary device to express the same concept in three different ways.<\/p>\nUgaritic and Eblaic, both west Semitic dialects, are closely related to Hebrew and contain striking literary similarities. Reference to archaic Ugaritic expressions has made it possible to translate properly some obscure Hebrew poetic language that is now seen to have preserved genuine ancient Canaanite phraseology.<\/p>\nAramaic, another northwest Semitic language, was spoken in the third millennium BC<\/span>, and is represented in the OT principally by chapters in Ezra and Daniel. These were written in imperial Aramaic, as are the Elephantine papyri of the fifth and fourth centuries BC<\/span>. It is now known, on the basis of the Aramaic used, to be linguistically incorrect to assign a late date to either Ezra or Daniel.<\/p>\nThe NT was written in koine<\/span>,<\/em> or “common” Greek, the language of the Near East and the Roman Empire. NT common Greek differs from other Greek dialects in containing underlying Semitic expressions, which are frequently unrecognized and therefore mistranslated by the unwary.<\/p>\nFrom the foregoing it is evident that archaeological discoveries have done much to enlarge our knowledge of the ancient world. Even with the limited data at our disposal it is possible to see the men and women of Scripture as real persons, living mostly in times of stress and uncertainty but often enjoying a high degree of culture unmatched until modern times. We see such persons as they should be seen—not as mythical or legendary figures, but as true children of their age, grappling with life’s problems and catching periodically a vision of God as all powerful and all holy, guiding the destinies of individuals and nations and bringing his purposes to pass in history. Archaeology has shown that the Hebrews must never be studied separately from other ancient Near Eastern peoples but instead must be seen as one element of a vast cultural complex that included such diverse peoples as the Sumerians and the Aegeans.<\/p>\nSuch study must be pursued in a consistently objective fashion, arguing from relevant evidence to a proper understanding of biblical events and life. It is sometimes difficult to reconcile certain accepted interpretations of archaeological data and the evidence of Scripture. Such conflicts are few in number, however, and tend to diminish noticeably as new information is forthcoming. In principle the archaeologist has no particular interest in “proving the truth” of the Scriptures, and it is obviously impossible for a spade or a trowel to prove or disprove the spiritual revelations and assertions of Scripture. But it is fair to say that archaeology validates Hebrew history and explains many formerly obscure terms and traditions in both the OT and NT. It thus provides an authentic background for the prophecies culminating in Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE* Simply defined, archaeology is the science that recovers and studies the relics of human antiquity. Biblical archaeology is concerned with the remains scattered across the Near East. Some lie buried at different levels in mounds; others survive as ruins or weathered monuments to past grandeur. Many of the artifacts bear inscriptions of sorts in a variety of ancient languages, some of which still need much study to be understood properly. Other artifacts comprise the...","summary_en":"ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE* Simply defined, archaeology is the science that recovers and studies the relics of human antiquity. Biblical archaeology is concerned with the remains scattered across the Near East. Some lie buried at different levels in mounds; others survive as ruins or weathered monuments to past grandeur. Many of the artifacts bear inscriptions of sorts in a variety of ancient languages, some of which still need much study to be understood properly. Other artifacts comprise the...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4626,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bible*","title_en":"Bible*","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*<\/h3>\nDerived from the Greek biblia<\/span> (“books”), which, though plural, came to be used as a singular noun and to stand for the collection of books known as the Scriptures. The idea of a collection of holy writings developed early in Hebrew-Christian thought. Daniel in the sixth century BC<\/span> spoke of a prophetic writing as “the books” (Dn 9:2). The writer of 1 Maccabees (second century BC<\/span>) referred to the OT as “the holy books” (12:9). Jesus referred to the OT books as “the scriptures” (Mt 21:42), and Paul spoke of them as “the holy scriptures” (Rom 1:2).<\/p>\nThe Bible is divided into the Old Testament and the New Testament. Of course, there was no OT and NT before the coming of Christ, only one collection of sacred writings. But after the apostles and their associates produced another body of sacred literature, the church began to refer to the OT and the NT. Actually “testament” is the translation of a Greek word that might better be rendered “covenant.” It denotes an arrangement made by God for the spiritual guidance and benefit of human beings. The covenant is unalterable: humankind may accept it or reject it but cannot change it. “Covenant” is a common OT word; of several covenants described in the OT, the most prominent was the law given to Moses. While Israel was chafing and failing under the Mosaic covenant, God promised them a “new covenant” (Jer 31:31).<\/p>\nThe term “new covenant” appears several times in the NT. Jesus used it when he instituted the Lord’s Supper; by it he sought to call attention to the new basis of communion with God he intended to establish by his death (Lk 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25). The apostle Paul also spoke of that new covenant (2 Cor 3:6, 14), as did the writer to the Hebrews (Heb 8:8; 9:11-15). The detailed description of God’s new method of dealing with people (on the basis of the finished work of Christ on the cross) is the subject of the 27 books of the NT. God’s dealing with people in anticipation of the coming of Messiah (Hebrew equivalent of “Christ,” meaning “anointed one”) is certainly the major theme of the 39 books of the OT, though they deal with much more than that. Latin church writers used testamentum<\/em> to translate “covenant,” and from them the use passed into English; so old and new covenants became OT and NT.<\/p>\nAt least the first half of the OT follows a logical and easily understood arrangement. In Genesis through Esther the history of Israel from Abraham to the restoration under Persian auspices appears largely in chronological order. Then follows a group of poetic books and the Major and Minor Prophets (“Major” meaning the books that are relatively long; “Minor” meaning the books that are relatively short).<\/p>\nThe NT also follows a generally logical arrangement. It begins with the four Gospels, which describe the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ and his training of disciples to carry on his work after his ascension. The book of Acts continues the narrative where the Gospels end and details the founding of the church and its spread through Mediterranean lands. In the latter part of the book the spotlight focuses on the apostle Paul and his church planting activities. Next come letters Paul addressed to churches he founded or to young ministers he tried to encourage. Following the Pauline Epistles come a group commonly called the General Epistles. The last book, Revelation, is an apocalyptic work.<\/p>\nThe OT was written almost entirely in Hebrew with a few isolated passages in Aramaic in the latter books. If one accepts the view that Moses wrote the first five books of the OT (the position the Scripture itself takes), the earliest books of the OT were written by about 1400 BC<\/span> (provided one accepts the early date proposed for the exodus). If the last book written was Malachi (before 400 BC<\/span>), composition took place during 1,000 years of time. All the writers (some 30 in number) were Jews: prophets, judges, kings, and other leaders in Israel.<\/p>\nThe NT was probably written entirely in Greek. If James was the first to write a NT book before the middle of the first century, and if John was the last (composing Revelation about AD<\/span> 90), the NT was written during a 50-year period in the latter half of the first century. All the writers (probably nine) were Jews, with the exception of Luke (writer of Luke and Acts), and they came from a variety of walks of life: fishermen, doctor, tax collector, and religious leaders.<\/p>\nIn spite of great diversity of authorship in the OT and NT, and composition spanning over 1,500 years, there is remarkable unity in the total thrust. Christians believe that God must have been superintending the production of a divine-human book that would properly present his message to humankind.<\/p>\nThe OT and NT are component parts of one divine revelation. The OT describes man and woman in the first paradise on the old earth; the NT concludes with a vision of the new heaven and new earth. The OT sees humankind as fallen from a sinless condition and separated from God; the NT views believers as restored to favor through the sacrifice of Christ. The OT predicts a coming Redeemer who will rescue men and women from eternal condemnation; the NT reveals the Christ who brought salvation. In most of the OT the spotlight focuses on a sacrificial system in which the blood of animals provided a temporary handling of the sin problem; in the New, Christ appeared as the one who came to put an end to all sacrifice—to be himself the supreme sacrifice. In the OT, numerous predictions foretold a coming Messiah who would save his people; in the New, scores of passages detail how those prophecies were minutely fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ: the “son of Abraham” and the “son of David” (Mt 1:1). As Augustine said more than 1,500 years ago, “The New is in the Old contained; the Old is in the New explained.”<\/p>\nThe Authority of the Bible<\/p>\nJudge of men and nations, the self-revealed God wields unlimited authority and power. All creaturely authority and power is derived from that of God. As the sovereign Creator of all, the God of the Bible wills and has the right to be obeyed. The power God bestows is a divine trust, a stewardship. God’s creatures are morally accountable for their use or misuse of it. In fallen human society God wills civil government for the promotion of justice and order. He approves an ordering of authoritative and creative relationships in the home by stipulating certain responsibilities of husbands, wives, and children. He wills a pattern of priorities for the church as well: Jesus Christ the head, prophets and apostles through whom redemptive revelation came, and so on. The inspired Scriptures, revealing God’s transcendent will in objective written form, are the rule of faith and conduct through which Christ exercises his divine authority in the lives of Christians.<\/p>\nRevolt against particular authorities has in our time widened into a revolt against all transcendent and external authority. The widespread questioning of authority is condoned and promoted in many academic circles. Philosophers with a radically secular outlook have affirmed that God and the supernatural are mythical conceptions, that natural processes and events comprise the only ultimate reality. All existence is said to be temporal and changing, all beliefs and ideals are declared to be relative to the age and culture in which they appear. Biblical religion, therefore, like all other, is asserted to be merely a cultural phenomenon. The Bible’s claim to divine authority is dismissed by such thinkers; transcendent revelation, fixed truths, and unchanging commandments are set aside as pious fictions.<\/p>\nIn the name of man’s supposed “coming of age,” radical secularism champions human autonomy and creative individuality. Man is his own lord and the inventor of his own ideals and values, it is said. He lives in a supposedly purposeless universe that has itself presumably been engendered by a cosmic accident. Therefore, human beings are declared to be wholly free to impose upon nature and history whatever moral criteria they prefer. In such a view, to insist on divinely given truths and values, on transcendent principles, would be to repress self-fulfillment and retard creative personal development. Hence, the radically secular view goes beyond opposing particular external authorities whose claims are considered arbitrary or immoral; radical secularism is aggressively hostile to all external and objective authority, viewing it as intrinsically restrictive of the autonomous human spirit.<\/p>\nAny reader of the Bible recognizes rejection of divine authority and of a definitive revelation of what is right and good as an age-old phenomenon. It is not at all peculiar to contemporary man to “come of age”; it was found already in Eden. Adam and Eve revolted against the will of God in pursuit of individual preference and self-interest. But their revolt was recognized to be sin, not rationalized as philosophical gnosis<\/span> at the frontiers of evolutionary advance.<\/p>\nIf one takes a strictly developmental view, which considers all reality contingent and changing, what basis remains for humanity’s decisively creative role in the universe? How could a purposeless cosmos cater to individual self-fulfillment? Only the biblical alternative of the Creator-Redeemer God, who fashioned human beings for moral obedience and a high spiritual destiny, truly preserves the permanent, universal dignity of the human species. The Bible does so, however, by a demanding call for personal spiritual decision. The Bible sets forth man’s superiority to the animals, his high dignity (“a little lower than God,” Ps 8:5, nasb<\/span>) because of the divine rational and moral image that he bears by creation. In the context of universal human involvement in Adamic sin, the Bible utters a merciful divine call to redemptive renewal through the mediatorial person and work of Christ. Fallen humanity is invited to experience the Holy Spirit’s renewing work, to be conformed to the image of Jesus Christ, and to anticipate a final destiny in the eternal presence of the God of justice and justification.<\/p>\nContemporary rejection of biblical tenets does not rest on any logical demonstration that the case for biblical theism is false; it turns rather on a subjective preference for alternative views of “the good life.”<\/p>\nThe Bible is not the only significant reminder that human beings stand daily in responsible relationship to the sovereign God. The Creator reveals his authority in the cosmos, in history, and in inner conscience, a disclosure of the living God that penetrates into the mind of every human being (Rom 1:18-20; 2:12-15). Rebellious suppression of that “general divine revelation” does not succeed in wholly suspending a fearsome sense of final divine accountability (1:32). Yet it is the Bible as “special revelation” that most clearly confronts our spiritually rebellious race with the reality and authority of God. In the Scriptures, the character and will of God, the meaning of human existence, the nature of the spiritual realm, and the purposes of God for human beings in all ages are stated in propositionally intelligible form that all can understand. The Bible publishes in objective form the criteria by which God judges individuals and nations, and the means of moral recovery and restoration to personal fellowship with him.<\/p>\nRegard for the Bible is therefore decisive for the course of Western culture and in the long run for human civilization generally. Intelligible divine revelation, the basis for belief in the sovereign authority of the Creator-Redeemer God over all human life, rests on the reliability of what Scripture says about God and his purposes. Modern naturalism impugns the authority of the Bible and assails the claim that the Bible is the Word of God written, that is, a transcendently given revelation of the mind and will of God in objective literary form. Scriptural authority is the storm center both in the controversy over revealed religion and in the modern conflict over civilizational values.<\/p>\nThe Bible’s View of Itself<\/p>\nThe intelligible nature of divine revelation—the presupposition that God’s will is made known in the form of valid truths—is the central presupposition of the authority of the Bible. Much recent neo-Protestant theology demeaned the traditional evangelical emphasis as doctrinaire and static. It insisted instead that the authority of Scripture is to be experienced internally as a witness to divine grace engendering faith and obedience, thus disowning its objective character as universally valid truth. Somewhat inconsistently, almost all neo-Protestant theologians have appealed to the record to support cognitively whatever fragments of the whole seem to coincide with their divergent views, even though they disavow the Bible as a specially revealed corpus of authoritative divine teaching. If God’s revelational disclosure to chosen prophets and apostles is to be considered meaningful and true, it must be given not merely in isolated concepts capable of diverse meanings but in sentences or propositions. A proposition—that is, a subject, predicate, and connecting verb (or “copula”)—constitutes the minimal logical unit of intelligible communication. The OT prophetic formula “Thus saith the Lord” characteristically introduced propositionally disclosed truth. Jesus Christ employed the distinctive formula “But I say unto you” to introduce logically formed sentences that he represented as the veritable word or doctrine of God.<\/p>\nThe Bible is authoritative because it is divinely authorized; in its own terms, “all Scripture is God-breathed” (2 Tm 3:16, niv<\/span>). According to this passage, the whole OT (or any element of it) is divinely inspired. Extension of the same claim to the NT is not expressly stated, but it is not merely implied. The New Testament contains indications that its content was to be viewed, and was in fact viewed, as no less authoritative than the Old. The apostle Paul’s writings are catalogued with “other Scriptures” (2 Pt 3:15-16). Under the heading of “Scripture,” 1 Timothy 5:18 cites Luke 10:7 alongside Deuteronomy 25:4 (cf. 1 Cor 9:9). The book of Revelation, moreover, claims divine origin (1:1-3) and employs the term “prophecy” in the OT sense (22:9-10, 18). The apostles did not distinguish their spoken and written teaching but expressly declared their inspired proclamation to be the word of God (1 Cor 4:1; 2 Cor 5:20; 1 Thes 2:13).<\/p>\nThe Bible remains the most extensively printed, most widely translated, and most frequently read book in the world. Its words have been treasured in the hearts of multitudes like none other’s. All who have received its gifts of wisdom and promises of new life and power were at first strangers to its redemptive message, and many were hostile to its teaching and spiritual demands. In all generations its power to challenge persons of all races and lands has been demonstrated. Those who cherish the Book because it sustains future hope, brings meaning and power to the present, and correlates a misused past with the forgiving grace of God would not long experience such inner rewards if Scripture were not known to them as the authoritative, divinely revealed truth. To the Christian, Scripture is the Word of God given in the objective form of propositional truths through divinely inspired prophets and apostles, and the Holy Spirit is the giver of faith through that word.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\nSeveral other major articles on the Bible follow:<\/p>\n• Bible, Canon of the<\/p>\n• Bible, Inspiration of the<\/p>\n• Bible, Manuscripts and Text of the (Old Testament)<\/p>\n• Bible, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/p>\n• Bible, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/p>\n• Bible, Versions of the (Ancient)<\/p>\n• Bible, Versions of the (English)<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*<\/h3>\nDerived from the Greek biblia<\/span> (“books”), which, though plural, came to be used as a singular noun and to stand for the collection of books known as the Scriptures. The idea of a collection of holy writings developed early in Hebrew-Christian thought. Daniel in the sixth century BC<\/span> spoke of a prophetic writing as “the books” (Dn 9:2). The writer of 1 Maccabees (second century BC<\/span>) referred to the OT as “the holy books” (12:9). Jesus referred to the OT books as “the scriptures” (Mt 21:42), and Paul spoke of them as “the holy scriptures” (Rom 1:2).<\/p>\nThe Bible is divided into the Old Testament and the New Testament. Of course, there was no OT and NT before the coming of Christ, only one collection of sacred writings. But after the apostles and their associates produced another body of sacred literature, the church began to refer to the OT and the NT. Actually “testament” is the translation of a Greek word that might better be rendered “covenant.” It denotes an arrangement made by God for the spiritual guidance and benefit of human beings. The covenant is unalterable: humankind may accept it or reject it but cannot change it. “Covenant” is a common OT word; of several covenants described in the OT, the most prominent was the law given to Moses. While Israel was chafing and failing under the Mosaic covenant, God promised them a “new covenant” (Jer 31:31).<\/p>\nThe term “new covenant” appears several times in the NT. Jesus used it when he instituted the Lord’s Supper; by it he sought to call attention to the new basis of communion with God he intended to establish by his death (Lk 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25). The apostle Paul also spoke of that new covenant (2 Cor 3:6, 14), as did the writer to the Hebrews (Heb 8:8; 9:11-15). The detailed description of God’s new method of dealing with people (on the basis of the finished work of Christ on the cross) is the subject of the 27 books of the NT. God’s dealing with people in anticipation of the coming of Messiah (Hebrew equivalent of “Christ,” meaning “anointed one”) is certainly the major theme of the 39 books of the OT, though they deal with much more than that. Latin church writers used testamentum<\/em> to translate “covenant,” and from them the use passed into English; so old and new covenants became OT and NT.<\/p>\nAt least the first half of the OT follows a logical and easily understood arrangement. In Genesis through Esther the history of Israel from Abraham to the restoration under Persian auspices appears largely in chronological order. Then follows a group of poetic books and the Major and Minor Prophets (“Major” meaning the books that are relatively long; “Minor” meaning the books that are relatively short).<\/p>\nThe NT also follows a generally logical arrangement. It begins with the four Gospels, which describe the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ and his training of disciples to carry on his work after his ascension. The book of Acts continues the narrative where the Gospels end and details the founding of the church and its spread through Mediterranean lands. In the latter part of the book the spotlight focuses on the apostle Paul and his church planting activities. Next come letters Paul addressed to churches he founded or to young ministers he tried to encourage. Following the Pauline Epistles come a group commonly called the General Epistles. The last book, Revelation, is an apocalyptic work.<\/p>\nThe OT was written almost entirely in Hebrew with a few isolated passages in Aramaic in the latter books. If one accepts the view that Moses wrote the first five books of the OT (the position the Scripture itself takes), the earliest books of the OT were written by about 1400 BC<\/span> (provided one accepts the early date proposed for the exodus). If the last book written was Malachi (before 400 BC<\/span>), composition took place during 1,000 years of time. All the writers (some 30 in number) were Jews: prophets, judges, kings, and other leaders in Israel.<\/p>\nThe NT was probably written entirely in Greek. If James was the first to write a NT book before the middle of the first century, and if John was the last (composing Revelation about AD<\/span> 90), the NT was written during a 50-year period in the latter half of the first century. All the writers (probably nine) were Jews, with the exception of Luke (writer of Luke and Acts), and they came from a variety of walks of life: fishermen, doctor, tax collector, and religious leaders.<\/p>\nIn spite of great diversity of authorship in the OT and NT, and composition spanning over 1,500 years, there is remarkable unity in the total thrust. Christians believe that God must have been superintending the production of a divine-human book that would properly present his message to humankind.<\/p>\nThe OT and NT are component parts of one divine revelation. The OT describes man and woman in the first paradise on the old earth; the NT concludes with a vision of the new heaven and new earth. The OT sees humankind as fallen from a sinless condition and separated from God; the NT views believers as restored to favor through the sacrifice of Christ. The OT predicts a coming Redeemer who will rescue men and women from eternal condemnation; the NT reveals the Christ who brought salvation. In most of the OT the spotlight focuses on a sacrificial system in which the blood of animals provided a temporary handling of the sin problem; in the New, Christ appeared as the one who came to put an end to all sacrifice—to be himself the supreme sacrifice. In the OT, numerous predictions foretold a coming Messiah who would save his people; in the New, scores of passages detail how those prophecies were minutely fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ: the “son of Abraham” and the “son of David” (Mt 1:1). As Augustine said more than 1,500 years ago, “The New is in the Old contained; the Old is in the New explained.”<\/p>\nThe Authority of the Bible<\/p>\nJudge of men and nations, the self-revealed God wields unlimited authority and power. All creaturely authority and power is derived from that of God. As the sovereign Creator of all, the God of the Bible wills and has the right to be obeyed. The power God bestows is a divine trust, a stewardship. God’s creatures are morally accountable for their use or misuse of it. In fallen human society God wills civil government for the promotion of justice and order. He approves an ordering of authoritative and creative relationships in the home by stipulating certain responsibilities of husbands, wives, and children. He wills a pattern of priorities for the church as well: Jesus Christ the head, prophets and apostles through whom redemptive revelation came, and so on. The inspired Scriptures, revealing God’s transcendent will in objective written form, are the rule of faith and conduct through which Christ exercises his divine authority in the lives of Christians.<\/p>\nRevolt against particular authorities has in our time widened into a revolt against all transcendent and external authority. The widespread questioning of authority is condoned and promoted in many academic circles. Philosophers with a radically secular outlook have affirmed that God and the supernatural are mythical conceptions, that natural processes and events comprise the only ultimate reality. All existence is said to be temporal and changing, all beliefs and ideals are declared to be relative to the age and culture in which they appear. Biblical religion, therefore, like all other, is asserted to be merely a cultural phenomenon. The Bible’s claim to divine authority is dismissed by such thinkers; transcendent revelation, fixed truths, and unchanging commandments are set aside as pious fictions.<\/p>\nIn the name of man’s supposed “coming of age,” radical secularism champions human autonomy and creative individuality. Man is his own lord and the inventor of his own ideals and values, it is said. He lives in a supposedly purposeless universe that has itself presumably been engendered by a cosmic accident. Therefore, human beings are declared to be wholly free to impose upon nature and history whatever moral criteria they prefer. In such a view, to insist on divinely given truths and values, on transcendent principles, would be to repress self-fulfillment and retard creative personal development. Hence, the radically secular view goes beyond opposing particular external authorities whose claims are considered arbitrary or immoral; radical secularism is aggressively hostile to all external and objective authority, viewing it as intrinsically restrictive of the autonomous human spirit.<\/p>\nAny reader of the Bible recognizes rejection of divine authority and of a definitive revelation of what is right and good as an age-old phenomenon. It is not at all peculiar to contemporary man to “come of age”; it was found already in Eden. Adam and Eve revolted against the will of God in pursuit of individual preference and self-interest. But their revolt was recognized to be sin, not rationalized as philosophical gnosis<\/span> at the frontiers of evolutionary advance.<\/p>\nIf one takes a strictly developmental view, which considers all reality contingent and changing, what basis remains for humanity’s decisively creative role in the universe? How could a purposeless cosmos cater to individual self-fulfillment? Only the biblical alternative of the Creator-Redeemer God, who fashioned human beings for moral obedience and a high spiritual destiny, truly preserves the permanent, universal dignity of the human species. The Bible does so, however, by a demanding call for personal spiritual decision. The Bible sets forth man’s superiority to the animals, his high dignity (“a little lower than God,” Ps 8:5, nasb<\/span>) because of the divine rational and moral image that he bears by creation. In the context of universal human involvement in Adamic sin, the Bible utters a merciful divine call to redemptive renewal through the mediatorial person and work of Christ. Fallen humanity is invited to experience the Holy Spirit’s renewing work, to be conformed to the image of Jesus Christ, and to anticipate a final destiny in the eternal presence of the God of justice and justification.<\/p>\nContemporary rejection of biblical tenets does not rest on any logical demonstration that the case for biblical theism is false; it turns rather on a subjective preference for alternative views of “the good life.”<\/p>\nThe Bible is not the only significant reminder that human beings stand daily in responsible relationship to the sovereign God. The Creator reveals his authority in the cosmos, in history, and in inner conscience, a disclosure of the living God that penetrates into the mind of every human being (Rom 1:18-20; 2:12-15). Rebellious suppression of that “general divine revelation” does not succeed in wholly suspending a fearsome sense of final divine accountability (1:32). Yet it is the Bible as “special revelation” that most clearly confronts our spiritually rebellious race with the reality and authority of God. In the Scriptures, the character and will of God, the meaning of human existence, the nature of the spiritual realm, and the purposes of God for human beings in all ages are stated in propositionally intelligible form that all can understand. The Bible publishes in objective form the criteria by which God judges individuals and nations, and the means of moral recovery and restoration to personal fellowship with him.<\/p>\nRegard for the Bible is therefore decisive for the course of Western culture and in the long run for human civilization generally. Intelligible divine revelation, the basis for belief in the sovereign authority of the Creator-Redeemer God over all human life, rests on the reliability of what Scripture says about God and his purposes. Modern naturalism impugns the authority of the Bible and assails the claim that the Bible is the Word of God written, that is, a transcendently given revelation of the mind and will of God in objective literary form. Scriptural authority is the storm center both in the controversy over revealed religion and in the modern conflict over civilizational values.<\/p>\nThe Bible’s View of Itself<\/p>\nThe intelligible nature of divine revelation—the presupposition that God’s will is made known in the form of valid truths—is the central presupposition of the authority of the Bible. Much recent neo-Protestant theology demeaned the traditional evangelical emphasis as doctrinaire and static. It insisted instead that the authority of Scripture is to be experienced internally as a witness to divine grace engendering faith and obedience, thus disowning its objective character as universally valid truth. Somewhat inconsistently, almost all neo-Protestant theologians have appealed to the record to support cognitively whatever fragments of the whole seem to coincide with their divergent views, even though they disavow the Bible as a specially revealed corpus of authoritative divine teaching. If God’s revelational disclosure to chosen prophets and apostles is to be considered meaningful and true, it must be given not merely in isolated concepts capable of diverse meanings but in sentences or propositions. A proposition—that is, a subject, predicate, and connecting verb (or “copula”)—constitutes the minimal logical unit of intelligible communication. The OT prophetic formula “Thus saith the Lord” characteristically introduced propositionally disclosed truth. Jesus Christ employed the distinctive formula “But I say unto you” to introduce logically formed sentences that he represented as the veritable word or doctrine of God.<\/p>\nThe Bible is authoritative because it is divinely authorized; in its own terms, “all Scripture is God-breathed” (2 Tm 3:16, niv<\/span>). According to this passage, the whole OT (or any element of it) is divinely inspired. Extension of the same claim to the NT is not expressly stated, but it is not merely implied. The New Testament contains indications that its content was to be viewed, and was in fact viewed, as no less authoritative than the Old. The apostle Paul’s writings are catalogued with “other Scriptures” (2 Pt 3:15-16). Under the heading of “Scripture,” 1 Timothy 5:18 cites Luke 10:7 alongside Deuteronomy 25:4 (cf. 1 Cor 9:9). The book of Revelation, moreover, claims divine origin (1:1-3) and employs the term “prophecy” in the OT sense (22:9-10, 18). The apostles did not distinguish their spoken and written teaching but expressly declared their inspired proclamation to be the word of God (1 Cor 4:1; 2 Cor 5:20; 1 Thes 2:13).<\/p>\nThe Bible remains the most extensively printed, most widely translated, and most frequently read book in the world. Its words have been treasured in the hearts of multitudes like none other’s. All who have received its gifts of wisdom and promises of new life and power were at first strangers to its redemptive message, and many were hostile to its teaching and spiritual demands. In all generations its power to challenge persons of all races and lands has been demonstrated. Those who cherish the Book because it sustains future hope, brings meaning and power to the present, and correlates a misused past with the forgiving grace of God would not long experience such inner rewards if Scripture were not known to them as the authoritative, divinely revealed truth. To the Christian, Scripture is the Word of God given in the objective form of propositional truths through divinely inspired prophets and apostles, and the Holy Spirit is the giver of faith through that word.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\nSeveral other major articles on the Bible follow:<\/p>\n• Bible, Canon of the<\/p>\n• Bible, Inspiration of the<\/p>\n• Bible, Manuscripts and Text of the (Old Testament)<\/p>\n• Bible, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/p>\n• Bible, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/p>\n• Bible, Versions of the (Ancient)<\/p>\n• Bible, Versions of the (English)<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE* Derived from the Greek biblia (“books”), which, though plural, came to be used as a singular noun and to stand for the collection of books known as the Scriptures. The idea of a collection of holy writings developed early in Hebrew-Christian thought. Daniel in the sixth century BC spoke of a prophetic writing as “the books” (Dn 9:2). The writer of 1 Maccabees (second century BC) referred to the OT as “the holy books” (12:9). Jesus referred to the OT books as “the scriptures” (Mt 21:42)...","summary_en":"BIBLE* Derived from the Greek biblia (“books”), which, though plural, came to be used as a singular noun and to stand for the collection of books known as the Scriptures. The idea of a collection of holy writings developed early in Hebrew-Christian thought. Daniel in the sixth century BC spoke of a prophetic writing as “the books” (Dn 9:2). The writer of 1 Maccabees (second century BC) referred to the OT as “the holy books” (12:9). Jesus referred to the OT books as “the scriptures” (Mt 21:42)...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4652,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Bible*, Canon","title_en":"of the Bible*, Canon","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, Canon of the<\/span><\/h3>\nThose books in the Jewish and Christian Bible considered to be Scripture and therefore authoritative in matters of faith and doctrine. The term translates both a Greek and a Hebrew word that mean “a rule,” or “measuring rod.” It is a list to which other books are compared and by which they are measured. After the fourth century AD<\/span>, the Christian church found itself with only 66 books that constituted its Scripture; 27 of these were the NT and 39 were the OT. Just as Plato, Aristotle, and Homer form a canon of Greek literature, so the NT books became the canon of Christian literature. The criteria for selecting the books in the Jewish canon (the OT) are not known but clearly had to do with their worth in the ongoing life and religion of the worshiping nation. The criteria of the selection of NT books revolved around their “apostolicity,” according to early church writers. Like those of the OT, these books were collected and preserved by local churches in the continuing process of their worship and need for authoritative guidance for Christian living. The formation of the canon was a process, rather than an event, that took several hundred years to reach finality in all parts of the Roman Empire. Local canons were the basis for comparison, and out of them eventually emerged the general canon that exists in Christendom today, although some of the Eastern churches have a NT that is slightly smaller than that accepted in the West. Judaism, as well as Christianity as a whole, believes that the Spirit of God was operative in some providential way in the production and preservation of his Word.<\/p>\nCanon of the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe Old Testament is a name that does not appear in Jewish literature. Jews prefer to call their collection of Scriptures the TANAK—an acronym formed from the first letters of Torah<\/em> (Law), Nevi<\/em>’<\/em>im<\/em> (Prophets), and Kethubim<\/em> (Writings). In Luke 24:44 (niv<\/span>), these are called the “Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (the first book of the Writings in the Hebrew Bible). Christians called their collection of writings the New Testament, or covenant, the latter term being a designation earlier used of the agreement God made with Abraham and the patriarchs, which was repeated by Christ to his apostles (Mt 26:28). Christians in the first century considered their new covenant from Christ (1 Cor 11:25) to be a continuation of the one made earlier with the patriarchs (Eph 2:12), spoken of by the prophets (Jer 31:31-34), and which was therefore called a former covenant (Heb 8:7-13; 9:1, 15-22) or in later centuries the OT. The terms “Old” and “New” do not appear in the apostolic fathers of the first and second century or in the apologists of the early- to mid-second century, but they do appear in the latter half of the second century in Justin Martyr (Dialogues<\/em> 11:2), Irenaeus (Against Heresies<\/em> 4.9.1), and Clement of Alexandria (Stromata<\/em> 1:5). In these authors the expression referred more to the covenant itself than to the books containing it, though the transfer was eventually made. The term “canon” was not used in the OT or NT to refer to the Jewish Scriptures. The idea of limitation inherent in the word was not appropriate to the nature of religious authority in Jewish religion during the thousand years when the OT books were being written. Only the Torah was conceived as incapable of being added to or taken from (Dt 4:2). Jewish religion existed for a millennium, from Moses to Malachi, without a closed canon, i.e., an exclusive list of authoritative books. Never in their history did the people of the OT have the entire 39 books of the OT. When their canon was closed is not known. Although some questions were being asked about religious authority by rabbis at Jamnia 20 years after the fall of Jerusalem in AD<\/span> 70, we have our first list of 39 books produced by Melito of Sardis around AD<\/span> 170. That list included no books written after the time of Malachi, unless one is disposed to date Daniel to the second century. The Prophets and the Writings were always considered secondary to the Law. Their composition and collection was a process rather than an event in the life of the people of Israel and functioned largely as a record of the nation’s response to the Law, which was so sacred that it was kept (according to rabbinical tradition: Babylonian Talmud, Baba Bathra<\/em> 14a; cf. also Cairo Damascus Document<\/em> 5.2) in the ark of the covenant that stood in the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle. In Deuteronomy 31:26, however, the Levites were commanded by Moses merely to put the Book of the Law beside the ark. Nevertheless, its very presence in the Holy of Holies establishes its uniqueness in relation to other OT books.<\/p>\n\nThe 39 books of the modern OT were originally divided into only 24, according to the uniform testimony of early Hebrew tradition. The Talmud, rabbinic literature, and probably 4 Esdras testify to this arrangement that included five books of the Law, eight Prophets, and eleven Writings (Greek—Hagiographa). Modern Hebrew Bibles reflect this tripartite arrangement that was used in the first three printed editions (Soncino, 1488; Naples, 1491–1493; Brescia, 1492–1494). The Law contained the Pentateuch in our familiar order, Genesis to Deuteronomy. The eight Prophets were Joshua, Judges, Samuel (1 and 2), Kings (1 and 2), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Minor Prophets (all 12), which were considered as one book and arranged in the same order as our English Bibles. The eleven books of Writings contained three of poetry (Ps, Prv, Jb), the Five Scrolls (Sg, Ru, Lam, Eccl, Est), which were read at the important feasts and arranged in the chronological order of their observance, and three of narrative or historical (Dn, Ezr-Neh, 1 and 2 Chr).<\/p>\nApart from authentic Jewish tradition, efforts were made to divide the books into 21, combining Ruth with Judges, and Lamentations with Jeremiah. Josephus was the first to do so, in the first century AD<\/span>, but he was influenced by the Greek OT, the Septuagint. Origen observed in the early third century that this arrangement also corresponded to the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet, as did Athanasius in the fourth, and others, including Jerome. It was dubiously concluded that the number of books in the Hebrew Bible had been divinely ordained to agree with the number of letters of the Hebrew alphabet! Church fathers added their support to this coincidence, which became providence to them. All such efforts, however, are of Greek origin and have no support in Hebrew tradition.<\/p>\nThe oldest extant manuscripts of the complete OT in Hebrew are the Masoretic Texts, which are no earlier than the eighth century AD<\/span>. Only manuscripts of individual books have been found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Masoretic scribes apparently laid down no rules about arrangement of books because there is no uniform order of the Latter Prophets or the Writings in early Hebrew manuscripts. Nor is the situation any different in ancient Greek translations of the Hebrew. Great diversity exists in the order of books in all three of our oldest manuscripts—Codex Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, and Sinaiticus. All the early Christian authors who profess to give the order and contents of the Hebrew Bible but who do not reflect the Hebrew tripartite division are clearly dependent on the Alexandrian order reflected in these Greek editions, rather than on the Hebrew Bible. Modern Protestant Bibles follow the order of the Latin Vulgate and the content of the Hebrew. Both the Vulgate and the Septuagint (Greek translation) contained the Apocrypha, which was never accepted by the Jews. The Roman Catholic Church includes the Apocrypha in its English translations because of the influence of the Vulgate on Catholic tradition. It is considered deuterocanonical.<\/p>\nEven though no uniformity of order was maintained, the Alexandrian order, reflected in the Greek manuscripts, generally arranged books according to their subject matter—narrative, history, poetry, and prophecy, with the apocryphal books appropriately interspersed into these categories. The Hebrew division was totally ignored.<\/p>\nEarly Hebrew Bibles divided the text into small paragraphs and larger sections somewhat akin to our paragraphs. These were indicated by spaces left between them—three letters between the small sections and nine letters between the larger ones. The number of sections is not the same in all manuscripts. Jesus probably referred to such sections in his comment concerning the “passage about the bush” (Mk 12:26). Later, liturgical needs led to further divisions of the text for the complete reading of the Law in Babylonian synagogues in one year (54 sections) and in Palestinian synagogues in three years (154 sections). These are reflected in the lectionary cycles marked in some early Hebrew Bibles.<\/p>\nThe division of the text into modern chapters, done in the 13th century (c. 1228) for the Latin Vulgate by Stephen Langton, was applied to the Hebrew Bible in 1518 (Bomberg Edition), but the numbers were not given to the chapters until 1571 in the text of Montanus, a Hebrew Bible with Latin interlinear translation. The verses were introduced in Bomberg’s Great Bible of 1547–48 in which every fifth verse was designated by a Hebrew numeral 1, 5, 10, and so on. Verses were inserted into the Latin Vulgate in 1555 in the small octavo edition of Stephanus.<\/p>\nCanon of the New Testament<\/p>\nThe NT was written within the period of half a century, several hundred years after the completion of the OT. Both halves of that statement would be questioned by modern critics, who would extend the time span for completion of both Testaments. The writer of this survey is confident of its truthfulness to historic fact, however, and the approach taken to canonization of both OT and NT is based solidly upon that twofold premise.<\/p>\nIn a sense, we possess far higher certification of the OT canon than of the NT canon. We refer to the fact of our Lord’s own imprimatur by way of his use of the Hebrew Scriptures as the authoritative Word of God. Yet there is a sense in which Jesus Christ did establish the NT content or canon as well, by way of anticipation. It was he who promised, “The Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you” and “he will guide you into all truth” (Jn 14:26; 16:13, niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n\nFrom this we can derive, in turn, the basic principle of canonicity for the NT. It is identical to that of the OT, since it narrows down to a matter of divine inspiration. Whether we think of the prophets of OT times or the apostles and their God-given associates of the New, the recognition at the very time of their writing that they were authentic spokesmen for God is what determines the intrinsic canonicity of their writing. It is altogether God’s Word only if it is God-breathed. We can be assured that the books under question were received by the church of the apostolic age precisely when they had been certified by an apostle as being thus inspired. The apparent variation, relative to geographic area, in acknowledgment of some of the NT epistles may well reflect the simple fact that this attestation was by its very nature localized at first. Conversely, that all 27 books of the now universally received NT were ultimately agreed upon is evidence that proper attestation was indeed confirmed after rigorous investigation.<\/p>\nTertullian, an outstanding Christian writer in the first two decades of the third century, was one of the first to call the Christian Scriptures the “New Testament.” That title had appeared earlier (c. 190) in a composition against Montanism, the author of which is unknown. This is significant. Its use placed the NT Scripture on a level of inspiration and authority with the OT.<\/p>\nFrom available information, the gradual process that led to full and formal public recognition of a fixed canon of the 27 books comprising the NT takes us down into the fourth century of our era. This does not necessarily mean that these Scriptures were lacking recognition in their entirety before that time, but that a need for officially defining the canon was not pressing until then.<\/p>\nThough a much shorter period of time was involved in the writing of the NT than the OT, the geographic range of its origin is far wider. This circumstance alone is sufficient to account for a lack of spontaneous or simultaneous recognition of the precise extent of the NT canon. Because of the geographic isolation of the various recipients of portions of the NT, there was bound to be some lag and uncertainty from one region to another in the acknowledgment of some of the books.<\/p>\nIn order to appreciate just what did transpire in the process of canonization of the NT books, we must review the facts available to us. This will enable us to analyze how<\/em> and why<\/em> our early Christian forebears settled upon the 27 books in our NT.<\/p>\nThe historic process was a gradual and continuous one, but it will help us understand it if we subdivide the nearly three and a half centuries involved into shorter periods of time. Some speak of three major stages toward canonization. This implies, without justification, that there are readily discernible steps along the way. Others simply present a long list of the names of persons and documents involved. Such a list makes it difficult to sense any motion at all. A somewhat arbitrary breakdown into five periods will be made here, with the reminder that the spreading of the knowledge of sacred literature and the deepening consensus as to its authenticity as inspired Scripture continued uninterruptedly. The periods are:<\/p>\n1. First Century<\/p>\n<li>2. First Half of Second Century<\/li>\n<li>3. Second Half of Second Century<\/li>\n<li>4. Third Century<\/li>\n<li>5. Fourth Century<\/li>\nAgain, without meaning to imply that these are clear-cut stages, it will be helpful to notice the major trends observable in each of the periods just identified. In the first period, of course, the various books were written, but they also began to be copied and disseminated among the churches. In the second, as they became more widely known and cherished for their contents, they began to be cited as authoritative. By the end of the third period, they held a recognized place alongside the OT as “Scripture,” and they began to be both translated into regional languages and made the subject of commentaries. During the third century AD<\/span>, our fourth period, the collecting of books into a whole “New Testament” was underway, together with a sifting process that was separating them from other Christian literature. The final, or fifth, period finds the church fathers of the fourth century stating that conclusions regarding the canon have been reached that indicate acceptance by the whole church. Thus, in the most strict and formal sense of the word, the canon had become fixed. It remains to list in greater detail the forces and individuals that produced the written sources witnessing to this remarkable process through which, by God’s providence, we have inherited our NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Period One: First Century<\/h5>\nThe principle determining recognition of the authority of the canonical NT writings was established within the content of those writings themselves. There are repeated exhortations for public reading of the apostolic communications. At the close of his First Letter to the Thessalonians, possibly the first book of the NT to be written, Paul says, “I command you in the name of the Lord to read this letter to all the brothers and sisters” (1 Thes 5:27, nlt<\/span>). Earlier in the same letter Paul commends their ready acceptance of his spoken word as “the word of God” (2:13), and in 1 Corinthians 14:37 he speaks similarly of his “writings,” insisting that his message be recognized as a commandment from the Lord himself. (See also Col 4:16; Rv 1:3.) In 2 Peter 3:15-16 Paul’s letters are included with “the other Scriptures.” Since Peter’s is a general letter, widespread knowledge of Paul’s letters is thereby implied. Highly indicative also is Paul’s usage in 1 Timothy 5:18. He follows up the formula “the Scriptures say” by a combined quotation about not muzzling an ox (Dt 25:4) and “the worker deserves his wages” (cf. Lk 10:7). Thus, an equivalence is implied between OT Scripture and a NT Gospel.<\/p>\nIn AD<\/span> 95, Clement of Rome wrote to the Christians in Corinth using a free rendering of material from Matthew and Luke. He seems to be strongly influenced by Hebrews and is obviously familiar with Romans and Corinthians. There are also reflections of Ephesians, 1 Timothy, Titus, and 1 Peter.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Two: First Half of Second Century<\/h5>\nOne of the earliest NT manuscripts yet discovered, a fragment of John from Egypt known as the John Rylands papyrus, demonstrates how the writings of the apostle John were revered and copied by about AD<\/span> 125, within 30 to 35 years of his death. There is evidence that within 30 years of the apostle’s death all the Gospels and Pauline letters were known and used in all those centers from which any evidence has come down to us. It is true that some of the smaller letters were being questioned as to their authority in some quarters for perhaps another 50 years, but this was due only to uncertainty about their authorship in those particular locales. This demonstrates that acceptance was not being imposed by the actions of councils but was rather happening spontaneously through a normal response on the part of those who had learned the facts about authorship. In those places where the churches were uncertain about the authorship or apostolic approval of certain books, acceptance was slower.<\/p>\nThe first three outstanding church fathers, Clement, Polycarp, and Ignatius, used the bulk of the material of the NT in a revealingly casual manner—authenticated Scriptures were being accepted as authoritative without argument. In the writings of these men only Mark (which closely parallels the material of Matthew), 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and Jude are not clearly attested.<\/p>\nThe Epistles of Ignatius (c. AD<\/span> 115) have correspondences in several places with the Gospels and seem to incorporate language from a number of the Pauline letters. The Didache (or Teaching of the Twelve), perhaps even earlier, makes references to a written Gospel. Most important is the fact that Clement, Barnabas, and Ignatius all draw a clear distinction between their own and the inspired, authoritative apostolic writings.<\/p>\nIt is in the Epistle of Barnabas (c. AD<\/span> 130) that we first find the formula “it is written” (4:14) used in reference to a NT book (Mt 22:14). But even before this, Polycarp, who had personal acquaintance with eyewitnesses of our Lord’s ministry, used a combined OT and NT quotation. Citing Paul’s admonition in Ephesians 4:26, where the apostle quotes Psalm 4:4 and makes an addition, Polycarp in his Epistle to the Philippians introduces the reference by “as it is said in these Scriptures” (12:4). Then Papias, bishop of Hierapolis (c. 130–140), in a work preserved for us by Eusebius, mentions by name the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, and his use of them as the basis of exposition indicates his acceptance of them as canonical. Also around AD<\/span> 140, the recently discovered Gospel of Truth (a Gnostic-oriented work probably authored by Valentinius) makes an important contribution. Its use of canonical NT sources, treating them as authoritative, is comprehensive enough to warrant the conclusion that in Rome at this period there was a NT compilation in existence corresponding very closely to our own. Citations are made from the Gospels, Acts, letters of Paul, Hebrews, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\nThe heretic Marcion, by defining a limited canon of his own (c. 140), in effect hastened the day when the orthodox believers needed to declare themselves on this issue. Rejecting the entire OT, Marcion settled for Luke’s Gospel (eliminating chapters 1 and 2 as too Jewish) and Paul’s letters (except for the pastoral ones). Interestingly, especially in the light of Colossians 4:16, he substitutes the name “Laodiceans” for Ephesians.<\/p>\nNear the end of this period, Justin Martyr, in describing the worship services of the early church, puts the apostolic writings on a par with those of the OT prophets. He states that the voice which spoke through the apostles of Christ in the NT was the same as that which spoke through the prophets—the voice of God—and the same voice that Abraham heard, responding in faith and obedience. Justin was also free in his use of “it is written” with quotations from NT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Three: Second Half of Second Century<\/h5>\nIrenaeus had been privileged to begin his Christian training under Polycarp, a disciple of apostles. Then, as a presbyter in Lyons, he had association with Bishop Pothinus, whose own background also included contact with firstgeneration Christians. Irenaeus quotes from almost all the NT on the basis of its authority and asserts that the apostles were endowed with power from on high. They were, he says, “fully informed concerning all things, and had a perfect knowledge . . . having indeed all in equal measure and each one singly the Gospel of God” (Against Heresies<\/em> 3.3). Irenaeus gives reasons why there should be four Gospels. “The word,” he says, “gave us the Gospel in a fourfold shape, but held together by one Spirit.” In addition to the Gospels, he makes reference also to Acts, all the letters of Paul except Philemon, 1 Peter, 1 John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\nTatian, pupil of Justin Martyr, made a harmony of the four Gospels, the Diatessaron,<\/em> attesting to the equal status they had in the church by AD<\/span> 170. Other “gospels” had come into existence by then, but he recognized only the four. Also dating from about 170 was the Muratorian Canon.<\/em> An eighth-century copy of this document was discovered and published in 1740 by librarian L. A. Muratori. The manuscript is mutilated at both ends, but the remaining text makes it evident that Matthew and Mark were included in the now missing part. The fragment begins with Luke and John, cites Acts, 13 Pauline letters, 1 and 2 John, Jude, and Revelation. There follows a statement, “We accept only the Apocalypse of John and Peter, although some of us do not want it [Apocalypse of Peter is 2 Peter?] to be read in the Church.” The list goes on to reject by name various heretical leaders and their writings.<\/p>\nTranslated versions existed by this period. In the form of Syriac and Old Latin translations we secure, by AD<\/span> 170, adequate witness from the extreme eastern and western branches of the church, as we might well expect from the other evidence in hand. The NT canon is represented with no additions and the omission of only one book, 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Four: Third Century<\/h5>\nThe outstanding Christian name of the third century is that of Origen (AD<\/span> 185– 254). A prodigious scholar and interpreter, he made critical studies of the NT text (alongside his work on the Hexapla<\/em>) and wrote commentaries and homilies on most of the books of the NT, emphasizing their inspiration by God.<\/p>\nDionysius of Alexandria, pupil of Origen, indicates that while the Western church accepted the book of Revelation from the first, its position in the East was variable. In the case of the Letter to the Hebrews, the situation was reversed. It proved to be more insecure in the West than in the East. When it comes to other contested books (note, incidently, that all in that category have the hindmost position in our present Bibles—Hebrews to Revelation), among the so-called “Catholic Epistles” Dionysius supports James and 2 and 3 John but not 2 Peter or Jude. In other words, even at the end of the third century there was the same lack of finality about certain books as at its beginning.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Five: Fourth Century<\/h5>\nEarly in this period, the picture begins to clarify. Eusebius (AD<\/span> 270–340, bishop of Caesarea before 315), the great church historian, sets forth his estimate of the canon in his Ecclesiastical History<\/em> (3.3–25). Herein he makes a straightforward statement on the status of the canon in the early part of the fourth century: (1) Universally agreed upon as canonical were the four Gospels, Acts, letters of Paul (including Hebrews, with question about his authorship), 1 Peter, 1 John, and Revelation. (2) Admitted by a majority, including Eusebius himself, but disputed by some were James, 2 Peter (the most strongly contested), 2 and 3 John, and Jude. (3) The Acts of Paul, the Didache, and Shepherd of Hermas were classified “spurious,” and still other writings were listed as “heretical and absurd.”<\/p>\nIt is in the latter half of the fourth century, however, that the NT canon finds full and final declaration. In his Festal Letter<\/em> for Easter, 367, Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria included information designed to eliminate once and for all the use of certain apocryphal books. This letter, with its admonition, “Let no one add to these; let nothing be taken away,” gives us the earliest extant document that specifies our 27 books without qualification. At the close of the century, the Council of Carthage (AD<\/span> 397) decreed that “aside from the canonical Scriptures nothing is to be read in church under the Name of Divine Scriptures.” This, too, lists the 27 books of the NT.<\/p>\nThe sudden advance of Christianity under Emperor Constantine (Edict of Milan, 313) had a great deal to do with the reception of all the NT books in the East. When he assigned Eusebius the task of preparing “fifty copies of the Divine Scriptures,” the historian, fully aware of which were the sacred books for which many believers had been willing to lay down their very lives, in effect established the standard that gave recognition to all of the once-doubtful books. In the West, of course, Jerome and Augustine were the leaders who exercised a determinitive influence. Publication of the 27 books in the Vulgate version virtually settled the matter.<\/p>\n<h5>Principles and Factors Determining the Canon<\/h5>\nBy its very nature, Holy Scripture, whether OT or NT, is a production given of God, not the work of human creation. The key to canonicity is divine inspiration. Therefore, the method of determination is not one of selection from a number of possible candidates (there are no other candidates, in actuality) but one of reception of authentic material and its consequent recognition by an ever-widening circle as the facts of its origin become known.<\/p>\nIn a sense, the movement of Montanus, which was declared heretical by the church of his day (mid-second century), was an impetus toward the recognition of a closed canon of the written Word of God. He taught that the prophetic gift was permanently granted to the church and that he himself was a prophet. The pressure to deal with Montanism, therefore, intensified the search for a basic authority, and apostolic authorship or approval became recognized as the only sure standard for identifying God’s revelation. Even within the Scripture record, first-century prophets were subordinate and subject to apostolic authority (see, for example, 1 Cor 14:29-30; Eph 4:11).<\/p>\nWhen all things were being reexamined in the Protestant Reformation, some of the Reformers sought means of reassuring themselves and their followers about the canon of Scripture. This was in some ways an unfortunate aspect of Reformation thinking, because once God in his providence had determined for his people the fixed content of Scripture, that became a fact of history and was not a repeatable process. Nevertheless, Luther established a theological test for the books of the Bible (and questioned some of them)—“Do they teach Christ?” Equally subjective, it would seem, was Calvin’s insistence that the Spirit of God bears witness to each individual Christian in any age of church history as to what is his Word and what is not.<\/p>\nActually, even for the initial acceptance of the written Word, it is neither safe nor sound (as far as Scripture or history teaches us) to say that recognition and reception was an intuitive matter. It was rather a matter of simple obedience to the known commands of Christ and his apostles. As we saw at the outset, our Lord promised (Jn 14:26; 16:13) to communicate all things necessary through his agents. The apostles were conscious of this responsibility and agency as they wrote. Paul’s explanation in 1 Corinthians 2:13 is apropos: “In telling you about these gifts we have even used the very words given to us by the Holy Spirit, not words that we as men might choose. So we use the Holy Spirit’s words to explain the Holy Spirit’s facts” (tlb<\/span>).<\/p>\nHence, the early church, with closer ties and greater information than is available to us today, examined the testimony of the ancients. They were able to discern which were the authentic and authoritative books by their apostolic origin. Mark’s association with Peter, and Luke’s with Paul, gave them such apostolic approval, and epistles like Hebrews and Jude were also tied in with the apostolic message and ministry. Incontrovertible consistency of doctrine in all the books, including the sometime contested ones, was perhaps a subordinate test. But historically the procedure was essentially one of acceptance and approval of those books that were vouched for by knowledgeable church leaders. Full acceptance by the original recipients followed by a continued acknowledgment and use is an essential factor in the development of the canon.<\/p>\nThe church’s concept of canon, derived first of all from the reverence given the OT Scriptures, rested in the conviction that the apostles were uniquely authorized to speak in the name of the one who possessed all authority—the Lord Jesus Christ. The development from there is logical and straightforward. Those who heard Jesus in person were immediately subject to his authority. He personally authenticated his words to the believers. These same believers knew that Jesus authorized his apostles to speak in his name, both during and (more significantly) after his earthly ministry. Apostolic speaking on behalf of Christ was recognized in the church, whether in personal utterance or in written form. Both the spoken word of an apostle and the letter of an apostle constituted the word of Christ.<\/p>\nThe generation that followed that of the apostles themselves received the witness of those who knew that the apostles had the right to speak and write in the name of Christ. Consequently, the second and third generation of Christians looked back to apostolic words (writings) as the very words of Christ. This is what is really meant by canonization—recognition of the divinely authenticated Word. Hence, the believers (the church) did not establish the canon but simply bore witness to its extent by recognizing the authority of the word of Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, Canon of the<\/span><\/h3>\nThose books in the Jewish and Christian Bible considered to be Scripture and therefore authoritative in matters of faith and doctrine. The term translates both a Greek and a Hebrew word that mean “a rule,” or “measuring rod.” It is a list to which other books are compared and by which they are measured. After the fourth century AD<\/span>, the Christian church found itself with only 66 books that constituted its Scripture; 27 of these were the NT and 39 were the OT. Just as Plato, Aristotle, and Homer form a canon of Greek literature, so the NT books became the canon of Christian literature. The criteria for selecting the books in the Jewish canon (the OT) are not known but clearly had to do with their worth in the ongoing life and religion of the worshiping nation. The criteria of the selection of NT books revolved around their “apostolicity,” according to early church writers. Like those of the OT, these books were collected and preserved by local churches in the continuing process of their worship and need for authoritative guidance for Christian living. The formation of the canon was a process, rather than an event, that took several hundred years to reach finality in all parts of the Roman Empire. Local canons were the basis for comparison, and out of them eventually emerged the general canon that exists in Christendom today, although some of the Eastern churches have a NT that is slightly smaller than that accepted in the West. Judaism, as well as Christianity as a whole, believes that the Spirit of God was operative in some providential way in the production and preservation of his Word.<\/p>\nCanon of the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe Old Testament is a name that does not appear in Jewish literature. Jews prefer to call their collection of Scriptures the TANAK—an acronym formed from the first letters of Torah<\/em> (Law), Nevi<\/em>’<\/em>im<\/em> (Prophets), and Kethubim<\/em> (Writings). In Luke 24:44 (niv<\/span>), these are called the “Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (the first book of the Writings in the Hebrew Bible). Christians called their collection of writings the New Testament, or covenant, the latter term being a designation earlier used of the agreement God made with Abraham and the patriarchs, which was repeated by Christ to his apostles (Mt 26:28). Christians in the first century considered their new covenant from Christ (1 Cor 11:25) to be a continuation of the one made earlier with the patriarchs (Eph 2:12), spoken of by the prophets (Jer 31:31-34), and which was therefore called a former covenant (Heb 8:7-13; 9:1, 15-22) or in later centuries the OT. The terms “Old” and “New” do not appear in the apostolic fathers of the first and second century or in the apologists of the early- to mid-second century, but they do appear in the latter half of the second century in Justin Martyr (Dialogues<\/em> 11:2), Irenaeus (Against Heresies<\/em> 4.9.1), and Clement of Alexandria (Stromata<\/em> 1:5). In these authors the expression referred more to the covenant itself than to the books containing it, though the transfer was eventually made. The term “canon” was not used in the OT or NT to refer to the Jewish Scriptures. The idea of limitation inherent in the word was not appropriate to the nature of religious authority in Jewish religion during the thousand years when the OT books were being written. Only the Torah was conceived as incapable of being added to or taken from (Dt 4:2). Jewish religion existed for a millennium, from Moses to Malachi, without a closed canon, i.e., an exclusive list of authoritative books. Never in their history did the people of the OT have the entire 39 books of the OT. When their canon was closed is not known. Although some questions were being asked about religious authority by rabbis at Jamnia 20 years after the fall of Jerusalem in AD<\/span> 70, we have our first list of 39 books produced by Melito of Sardis around AD<\/span> 170. That list included no books written after the time of Malachi, unless one is disposed to date Daniel to the second century. The Prophets and the Writings were always considered secondary to the Law. Their composition and collection was a process rather than an event in the life of the people of Israel and functioned largely as a record of the nation’s response to the Law, which was so sacred that it was kept (according to rabbinical tradition: Babylonian Talmud, Baba Bathra<\/em> 14a; cf. also Cairo Damascus Document<\/em> 5.2) in the ark of the covenant that stood in the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle. In Deuteronomy 31:26, however, the Levites were commanded by Moses merely to put the Book of the Law beside the ark. Nevertheless, its very presence in the Holy of Holies establishes its uniqueness in relation to other OT books.<\/p>\n\nThe 39 books of the modern OT were originally divided into only 24, according to the uniform testimony of early Hebrew tradition. The Talmud, rabbinic literature, and probably 4 Esdras testify to this arrangement that included five books of the Law, eight Prophets, and eleven Writings (Greek—Hagiographa). Modern Hebrew Bibles reflect this tripartite arrangement that was used in the first three printed editions (Soncino, 1488; Naples, 1491–1493; Brescia, 1492–1494). The Law contained the Pentateuch in our familiar order, Genesis to Deuteronomy. The eight Prophets were Joshua, Judges, Samuel (1 and 2), Kings (1 and 2), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Minor Prophets (all 12), which were considered as one book and arranged in the same order as our English Bibles. The eleven books of Writings contained three of poetry (Ps, Prv, Jb), the Five Scrolls (Sg, Ru, Lam, Eccl, Est), which were read at the important feasts and arranged in the chronological order of their observance, and three of narrative or historical (Dn, Ezr-Neh, 1 and 2 Chr).<\/p>\nApart from authentic Jewish tradition, efforts were made to divide the books into 21, combining Ruth with Judges, and Lamentations with Jeremiah. Josephus was the first to do so, in the first century AD<\/span>, but he was influenced by the Greek OT, the Septuagint. Origen observed in the early third century that this arrangement also corresponded to the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet, as did Athanasius in the fourth, and others, including Jerome. It was dubiously concluded that the number of books in the Hebrew Bible had been divinely ordained to agree with the number of letters of the Hebrew alphabet! Church fathers added their support to this coincidence, which became providence to them. All such efforts, however, are of Greek origin and have no support in Hebrew tradition.<\/p>\nThe oldest extant manuscripts of the complete OT in Hebrew are the Masoretic Texts, which are no earlier than the eighth century AD<\/span>. Only manuscripts of individual books have been found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Masoretic scribes apparently laid down no rules about arrangement of books because there is no uniform order of the Latter Prophets or the Writings in early Hebrew manuscripts. Nor is the situation any different in ancient Greek translations of the Hebrew. Great diversity exists in the order of books in all three of our oldest manuscripts—Codex Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, and Sinaiticus. All the early Christian authors who profess to give the order and contents of the Hebrew Bible but who do not reflect the Hebrew tripartite division are clearly dependent on the Alexandrian order reflected in these Greek editions, rather than on the Hebrew Bible. Modern Protestant Bibles follow the order of the Latin Vulgate and the content of the Hebrew. Both the Vulgate and the Septuagint (Greek translation) contained the Apocrypha, which was never accepted by the Jews. The Roman Catholic Church includes the Apocrypha in its English translations because of the influence of the Vulgate on Catholic tradition. It is considered deuterocanonical.<\/p>\nEven though no uniformity of order was maintained, the Alexandrian order, reflected in the Greek manuscripts, generally arranged books according to their subject matter—narrative, history, poetry, and prophecy, with the apocryphal books appropriately interspersed into these categories. The Hebrew division was totally ignored.<\/p>\nEarly Hebrew Bibles divided the text into small paragraphs and larger sections somewhat akin to our paragraphs. These were indicated by spaces left between them—three letters between the small sections and nine letters between the larger ones. The number of sections is not the same in all manuscripts. Jesus probably referred to such sections in his comment concerning the “passage about the bush” (Mk 12:26). Later, liturgical needs led to further divisions of the text for the complete reading of the Law in Babylonian synagogues in one year (54 sections) and in Palestinian synagogues in three years (154 sections). These are reflected in the lectionary cycles marked in some early Hebrew Bibles.<\/p>\nThe division of the text into modern chapters, done in the 13th century (c. 1228) for the Latin Vulgate by Stephen Langton, was applied to the Hebrew Bible in 1518 (Bomberg Edition), but the numbers were not given to the chapters until 1571 in the text of Montanus, a Hebrew Bible with Latin interlinear translation. The verses were introduced in Bomberg’s Great Bible of 1547–48 in which every fifth verse was designated by a Hebrew numeral 1, 5, 10, and so on. Verses were inserted into the Latin Vulgate in 1555 in the small octavo edition of Stephanus.<\/p>\nCanon of the New Testament<\/p>\nThe NT was written within the period of half a century, several hundred years after the completion of the OT. Both halves of that statement would be questioned by modern critics, who would extend the time span for completion of both Testaments. The writer of this survey is confident of its truthfulness to historic fact, however, and the approach taken to canonization of both OT and NT is based solidly upon that twofold premise.<\/p>\nIn a sense, we possess far higher certification of the OT canon than of the NT canon. We refer to the fact of our Lord’s own imprimatur by way of his use of the Hebrew Scriptures as the authoritative Word of God. Yet there is a sense in which Jesus Christ did establish the NT content or canon as well, by way of anticipation. It was he who promised, “The Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you” and “he will guide you into all truth” (Jn 14:26; 16:13, niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n\nFrom this we can derive, in turn, the basic principle of canonicity for the NT. It is identical to that of the OT, since it narrows down to a matter of divine inspiration. Whether we think of the prophets of OT times or the apostles and their God-given associates of the New, the recognition at the very time of their writing that they were authentic spokesmen for God is what determines the intrinsic canonicity of their writing. It is altogether God’s Word only if it is God-breathed. We can be assured that the books under question were received by the church of the apostolic age precisely when they had been certified by an apostle as being thus inspired. The apparent variation, relative to geographic area, in acknowledgment of some of the NT epistles may well reflect the simple fact that this attestation was by its very nature localized at first. Conversely, that all 27 books of the now universally received NT were ultimately agreed upon is evidence that proper attestation was indeed confirmed after rigorous investigation.<\/p>\nTertullian, an outstanding Christian writer in the first two decades of the third century, was one of the first to call the Christian Scriptures the “New Testament.” That title had appeared earlier (c. 190) in a composition against Montanism, the author of which is unknown. This is significant. Its use placed the NT Scripture on a level of inspiration and authority with the OT.<\/p>\nFrom available information, the gradual process that led to full and formal public recognition of a fixed canon of the 27 books comprising the NT takes us down into the fourth century of our era. This does not necessarily mean that these Scriptures were lacking recognition in their entirety before that time, but that a need for officially defining the canon was not pressing until then.<\/p>\nThough a much shorter period of time was involved in the writing of the NT than the OT, the geographic range of its origin is far wider. This circumstance alone is sufficient to account for a lack of spontaneous or simultaneous recognition of the precise extent of the NT canon. Because of the geographic isolation of the various recipients of portions of the NT, there was bound to be some lag and uncertainty from one region to another in the acknowledgment of some of the books.<\/p>\nIn order to appreciate just what did transpire in the process of canonization of the NT books, we must review the facts available to us. This will enable us to analyze how<\/em> and why<\/em> our early Christian forebears settled upon the 27 books in our NT.<\/p>\nThe historic process was a gradual and continuous one, but it will help us understand it if we subdivide the nearly three and a half centuries involved into shorter periods of time. Some speak of three major stages toward canonization. This implies, without justification, that there are readily discernible steps along the way. Others simply present a long list of the names of persons and documents involved. Such a list makes it difficult to sense any motion at all. A somewhat arbitrary breakdown into five periods will be made here, with the reminder that the spreading of the knowledge of sacred literature and the deepening consensus as to its authenticity as inspired Scripture continued uninterruptedly. The periods are:<\/p>\n1. First Century<\/p>\n<li>2. First Half of Second Century<\/li>\n<li>3. Second Half of Second Century<\/li>\n<li>4. Third Century<\/li>\n<li>5. Fourth Century<\/li>\nAgain, without meaning to imply that these are clear-cut stages, it will be helpful to notice the major trends observable in each of the periods just identified. In the first period, of course, the various books were written, but they also began to be copied and disseminated among the churches. In the second, as they became more widely known and cherished for their contents, they began to be cited as authoritative. By the end of the third period, they held a recognized place alongside the OT as “Scripture,” and they began to be both translated into regional languages and made the subject of commentaries. During the third century AD<\/span>, our fourth period, the collecting of books into a whole “New Testament” was underway, together with a sifting process that was separating them from other Christian literature. The final, or fifth, period finds the church fathers of the fourth century stating that conclusions regarding the canon have been reached that indicate acceptance by the whole church. Thus, in the most strict and formal sense of the word, the canon had become fixed. It remains to list in greater detail the forces and individuals that produced the written sources witnessing to this remarkable process through which, by God’s providence, we have inherited our NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Period One: First Century<\/h5>\nThe principle determining recognition of the authority of the canonical NT writings was established within the content of those writings themselves. There are repeated exhortations for public reading of the apostolic communications. At the close of his First Letter to the Thessalonians, possibly the first book of the NT to be written, Paul says, “I command you in the name of the Lord to read this letter to all the brothers and sisters” (1 Thes 5:27, nlt<\/span>). Earlier in the same letter Paul commends their ready acceptance of his spoken word as “the word of God” (2:13), and in 1 Corinthians 14:37 he speaks similarly of his “writings,” insisting that his message be recognized as a commandment from the Lord himself. (See also Col 4:16; Rv 1:3.) In 2 Peter 3:15-16 Paul’s letters are included with “the other Scriptures.” Since Peter’s is a general letter, widespread knowledge of Paul’s letters is thereby implied. Highly indicative also is Paul’s usage in 1 Timothy 5:18. He follows up the formula “the Scriptures say” by a combined quotation about not muzzling an ox (Dt 25:4) and “the worker deserves his wages” (cf. Lk 10:7). Thus, an equivalence is implied between OT Scripture and a NT Gospel.<\/p>\nIn AD<\/span> 95, Clement of Rome wrote to the Christians in Corinth using a free rendering of material from Matthew and Luke. He seems to be strongly influenced by Hebrews and is obviously familiar with Romans and Corinthians. There are also reflections of Ephesians, 1 Timothy, Titus, and 1 Peter.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Two: First Half of Second Century<\/h5>\nOne of the earliest NT manuscripts yet discovered, a fragment of John from Egypt known as the John Rylands papyrus, demonstrates how the writings of the apostle John were revered and copied by about AD<\/span> 125, within 30 to 35 years of his death. There is evidence that within 30 years of the apostle’s death all the Gospels and Pauline letters were known and used in all those centers from which any evidence has come down to us. It is true that some of the smaller letters were being questioned as to their authority in some quarters for perhaps another 50 years, but this was due only to uncertainty about their authorship in those particular locales. This demonstrates that acceptance was not being imposed by the actions of councils but was rather happening spontaneously through a normal response on the part of those who had learned the facts about authorship. In those places where the churches were uncertain about the authorship or apostolic approval of certain books, acceptance was slower.<\/p>\nThe first three outstanding church fathers, Clement, Polycarp, and Ignatius, used the bulk of the material of the NT in a revealingly casual manner—authenticated Scriptures were being accepted as authoritative without argument. In the writings of these men only Mark (which closely parallels the material of Matthew), 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and Jude are not clearly attested.<\/p>\nThe Epistles of Ignatius (c. AD<\/span> 115) have correspondences in several places with the Gospels and seem to incorporate language from a number of the Pauline letters. The Didache (or Teaching of the Twelve), perhaps even earlier, makes references to a written Gospel. Most important is the fact that Clement, Barnabas, and Ignatius all draw a clear distinction between their own and the inspired, authoritative apostolic writings.<\/p>\nIt is in the Epistle of Barnabas (c. AD<\/span> 130) that we first find the formula “it is written” (4:14) used in reference to a NT book (Mt 22:14). But even before this, Polycarp, who had personal acquaintance with eyewitnesses of our Lord’s ministry, used a combined OT and NT quotation. Citing Paul’s admonition in Ephesians 4:26, where the apostle quotes Psalm 4:4 and makes an addition, Polycarp in his Epistle to the Philippians introduces the reference by “as it is said in these Scriptures” (12:4). Then Papias, bishop of Hierapolis (c. 130–140), in a work preserved for us by Eusebius, mentions by name the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, and his use of them as the basis of exposition indicates his acceptance of them as canonical. Also around AD<\/span> 140, the recently discovered Gospel of Truth (a Gnostic-oriented work probably authored by Valentinius) makes an important contribution. Its use of canonical NT sources, treating them as authoritative, is comprehensive enough to warrant the conclusion that in Rome at this period there was a NT compilation in existence corresponding very closely to our own. Citations are made from the Gospels, Acts, letters of Paul, Hebrews, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\nThe heretic Marcion, by defining a limited canon of his own (c. 140), in effect hastened the day when the orthodox believers needed to declare themselves on this issue. Rejecting the entire OT, Marcion settled for Luke’s Gospel (eliminating chapters 1 and 2 as too Jewish) and Paul’s letters (except for the pastoral ones). Interestingly, especially in the light of Colossians 4:16, he substitutes the name “Laodiceans” for Ephesians.<\/p>\nNear the end of this period, Justin Martyr, in describing the worship services of the early church, puts the apostolic writings on a par with those of the OT prophets. He states that the voice which spoke through the apostles of Christ in the NT was the same as that which spoke through the prophets—the voice of God—and the same voice that Abraham heard, responding in faith and obedience. Justin was also free in his use of “it is written” with quotations from NT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Three: Second Half of Second Century<\/h5>\nIrenaeus had been privileged to begin his Christian training under Polycarp, a disciple of apostles. Then, as a presbyter in Lyons, he had association with Bishop Pothinus, whose own background also included contact with firstgeneration Christians. Irenaeus quotes from almost all the NT on the basis of its authority and asserts that the apostles were endowed with power from on high. They were, he says, “fully informed concerning all things, and had a perfect knowledge . . . having indeed all in equal measure and each one singly the Gospel of God” (Against Heresies<\/em> 3.3). Irenaeus gives reasons why there should be four Gospels. “The word,” he says, “gave us the Gospel in a fourfold shape, but held together by one Spirit.” In addition to the Gospels, he makes reference also to Acts, all the letters of Paul except Philemon, 1 Peter, 1 John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\nTatian, pupil of Justin Martyr, made a harmony of the four Gospels, the Diatessaron,<\/em> attesting to the equal status they had in the church by AD<\/span> 170. Other “gospels” had come into existence by then, but he recognized only the four. Also dating from about 170 was the Muratorian Canon.<\/em> An eighth-century copy of this document was discovered and published in 1740 by librarian L. A. Muratori. The manuscript is mutilated at both ends, but the remaining text makes it evident that Matthew and Mark were included in the now missing part. The fragment begins with Luke and John, cites Acts, 13 Pauline letters, 1 and 2 John, Jude, and Revelation. There follows a statement, “We accept only the Apocalypse of John and Peter, although some of us do not want it [Apocalypse of Peter is 2 Peter?] to be read in the Church.” The list goes on to reject by name various heretical leaders and their writings.<\/p>\nTranslated versions existed by this period. In the form of Syriac and Old Latin translations we secure, by AD<\/span> 170, adequate witness from the extreme eastern and western branches of the church, as we might well expect from the other evidence in hand. The NT canon is represented with no additions and the omission of only one book, 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Four: Third Century<\/h5>\nThe outstanding Christian name of the third century is that of Origen (AD<\/span> 185– 254). A prodigious scholar and interpreter, he made critical studies of the NT text (alongside his work on the Hexapla<\/em>) and wrote commentaries and homilies on most of the books of the NT, emphasizing their inspiration by God.<\/p>\nDionysius of Alexandria, pupil of Origen, indicates that while the Western church accepted the book of Revelation from the first, its position in the East was variable. In the case of the Letter to the Hebrews, the situation was reversed. It proved to be more insecure in the West than in the East. When it comes to other contested books (note, incidently, that all in that category have the hindmost position in our present Bibles—Hebrews to Revelation), among the so-called “Catholic Epistles” Dionysius supports James and 2 and 3 John but not 2 Peter or Jude. In other words, even at the end of the third century there was the same lack of finality about certain books as at its beginning.<\/p>\n<h5>Period Five: Fourth Century<\/h5>\nEarly in this period, the picture begins to clarify. Eusebius (AD<\/span> 270–340, bishop of Caesarea before 315), the great church historian, sets forth his estimate of the canon in his Ecclesiastical History<\/em> (3.3–25). Herein he makes a straightforward statement on the status of the canon in the early part of the fourth century: (1) Universally agreed upon as canonical were the four Gospels, Acts, letters of Paul (including Hebrews, with question about his authorship), 1 Peter, 1 John, and Revelation. (2) Admitted by a majority, including Eusebius himself, but disputed by some were James, 2 Peter (the most strongly contested), 2 and 3 John, and Jude. (3) The Acts of Paul, the Didache, and Shepherd of Hermas were classified “spurious,” and still other writings were listed as “heretical and absurd.”<\/p>\nIt is in the latter half of the fourth century, however, that the NT canon finds full and final declaration. In his Festal Letter<\/em> for Easter, 367, Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria included information designed to eliminate once and for all the use of certain apocryphal books. This letter, with its admonition, “Let no one add to these; let nothing be taken away,” gives us the earliest extant document that specifies our 27 books without qualification. At the close of the century, the Council of Carthage (AD<\/span> 397) decreed that “aside from the canonical Scriptures nothing is to be read in church under the Name of Divine Scriptures.” This, too, lists the 27 books of the NT.<\/p>\nThe sudden advance of Christianity under Emperor Constantine (Edict of Milan, 313) had a great deal to do with the reception of all the NT books in the East. When he assigned Eusebius the task of preparing “fifty copies of the Divine Scriptures,” the historian, fully aware of which were the sacred books for which many believers had been willing to lay down their very lives, in effect established the standard that gave recognition to all of the once-doubtful books. In the West, of course, Jerome and Augustine were the leaders who exercised a determinitive influence. Publication of the 27 books in the Vulgate version virtually settled the matter.<\/p>\n<h5>Principles and Factors Determining the Canon<\/h5>\nBy its very nature, Holy Scripture, whether OT or NT, is a production given of God, not the work of human creation. The key to canonicity is divine inspiration. Therefore, the method of determination is not one of selection from a number of possible candidates (there are no other candidates, in actuality) but one of reception of authentic material and its consequent recognition by an ever-widening circle as the facts of its origin become known.<\/p>\nIn a sense, the movement of Montanus, which was declared heretical by the church of his day (mid-second century), was an impetus toward the recognition of a closed canon of the written Word of God. He taught that the prophetic gift was permanently granted to the church and that he himself was a prophet. The pressure to deal with Montanism, therefore, intensified the search for a basic authority, and apostolic authorship or approval became recognized as the only sure standard for identifying God’s revelation. Even within the Scripture record, first-century prophets were subordinate and subject to apostolic authority (see, for example, 1 Cor 14:29-30; Eph 4:11).<\/p>\nWhen all things were being reexamined in the Protestant Reformation, some of the Reformers sought means of reassuring themselves and their followers about the canon of Scripture. This was in some ways an unfortunate aspect of Reformation thinking, because once God in his providence had determined for his people the fixed content of Scripture, that became a fact of history and was not a repeatable process. Nevertheless, Luther established a theological test for the books of the Bible (and questioned some of them)—“Do they teach Christ?” Equally subjective, it would seem, was Calvin’s insistence that the Spirit of God bears witness to each individual Christian in any age of church history as to what is his Word and what is not.<\/p>\nActually, even for the initial acceptance of the written Word, it is neither safe nor sound (as far as Scripture or history teaches us) to say that recognition and reception was an intuitive matter. It was rather a matter of simple obedience to the known commands of Christ and his apostles. As we saw at the outset, our Lord promised (Jn 14:26; 16:13) to communicate all things necessary through his agents. The apostles were conscious of this responsibility and agency as they wrote. Paul’s explanation in 1 Corinthians 2:13 is apropos: “In telling you about these gifts we have even used the very words given to us by the Holy Spirit, not words that we as men might choose. So we use the Holy Spirit’s words to explain the Holy Spirit’s facts” (tlb<\/span>).<\/p>\nHence, the early church, with closer ties and greater information than is available to us today, examined the testimony of the ancients. They were able to discern which were the authentic and authoritative books by their apostolic origin. Mark’s association with Peter, and Luke’s with Paul, gave them such apostolic approval, and epistles like Hebrews and Jude were also tied in with the apostolic message and ministry. Incontrovertible consistency of doctrine in all the books, including the sometime contested ones, was perhaps a subordinate test. But historically the procedure was essentially one of acceptance and approval of those books that were vouched for by knowledgeable church leaders. Full acceptance by the original recipients followed by a continued acknowledgment and use is an essential factor in the development of the canon.<\/p>\nThe church’s concept of canon, derived first of all from the reverence given the OT Scriptures, rested in the conviction that the apostles were uniquely authorized to speak in the name of the one who possessed all authority—the Lord Jesus Christ. The development from there is logical and straightforward. Those who heard Jesus in person were immediately subject to his authority. He personally authenticated his words to the believers. These same believers knew that Jesus authorized his apostles to speak in his name, both during and (more significantly) after his earthly ministry. Apostolic speaking on behalf of Christ was recognized in the church, whether in personal utterance or in written form. Both the spoken word of an apostle and the letter of an apostle constituted the word of Christ.<\/p>\nThe generation that followed that of the apostles themselves received the witness of those who knew that the apostles had the right to speak and write in the name of Christ. Consequently, the second and third generation of Christians looked back to apostolic words (writings) as the very words of Christ. This is what is really meant by canonization—recognition of the divinely authenticated Word. Hence, the believers (the church) did not establish the canon but simply bore witness to its extent by recognizing the authority of the word of Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Canon of the Those books in the Jewish and Christian Bible considered to be Scripture and therefore authoritative in matters of faith and doctrine. The term translates both a Greek and a Hebrew word that mean “a rule,” or “measuring rod.” It is a list to which other books are compared and by which they are measured. After the fourth century AD, the Christian church found itself with only 66 books that constituted its Scripture; 27 of these were the NT and 39 were the OT. Just as Plato...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Canon of the Those books in the Jewish and Christian Bible considered to be Scripture and therefore authoritative in matters of faith and doctrine. The term translates both a Greek and a Hebrew word that mean “a rule,” or “measuring rod.” It is a list to which other books are compared and by which they are measured. After the fourth century AD, the Christian church found itself with only 66 books that constituted its Scripture; 27 of these were the NT and 39 were the OT. Just as Plato...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4844,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","title_en":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\nOT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\nOne of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\nThe OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\nIn addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\nQuotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\nIn addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\nDistribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\nThe books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\nMatthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\nIn addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\nThe important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\nDifficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\nOften when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\nSome of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\nThere are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\nThe wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\nAdded to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\nSome examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, he<\/em> led captivity captive; he gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, “he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\nMatthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\nRomans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\nAn awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\nThe Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\nThe methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\nThe methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\nA different method of interpretation is based on the concept of corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\nCorrespondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\nWith these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\nThere are other texts where there seems to be an actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\nThe most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\nThe Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\nOT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\nOne of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\nThe OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\nIn addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\nQuotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\nIn addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\nDistribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\nThe books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\nMatthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\nIn addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\nThe important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\nDifficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\nOften when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\nSome of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\nThere are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\nThe wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\nAdded to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\nSome examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, he<\/em> led captivity captive; he gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, “he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\nMatthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\nRomans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\nAn awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\nThe Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\nThe methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\nThe methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\nA different method of interpretation is based on the concept of corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\nCorrespondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\nWith these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\nThere are other texts where there seems to be an actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\nThe most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\nThe Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7252,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Commandment, the New","title_en":"Commandment, the New","content_ro":"<h3>COMMANDMENT, The New<\/h3>\nChrist’s commandment for Christians to love each other. The phrase “new commandment” occurs four times in the NT, all in the writings of John (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:7, 8; 2 Jn 1:5). Initially, it was a command given by Jesus to his disciples on the night of his arrest: “I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other” (Jn 13:34, nlt<\/span>). The same command occurs elsewhere (Jn 15:12, 17; Rom 13:8; 1 Pt 1:22; 1 Jn 3:11, 23; 4:7, 11-12) but is not called “new” in those passages.<\/p>\nLove as a Commandment<\/p>\nJesus had already commanded his disciples to love their enemies (Mt 5:43-45) and to love their neighbors as themselves (Lk 10:25-37). The “new commandment” demanded that Christians love each other. In no sense did it overrule the other two love commands. Jesus’ command to love those within the church was intended to produce a compelling testimony to those outside the church. It would offer them demonstrable proof (1) that his followers were Christlike in their love toward one another; (2) that the basis for vital human community could be found “in Christ”; and (3) that, by extension, what Jesus said about himself and his work was really true (Jn 13:35; 17:21-23).<\/p>\nJesus chose the word used to describe the OT law, giving similar authority to his new commandment. In fact, the law included commands to love (Lv 19:18, 34; Dt 10:19). The apostle Paul thought of love as the “law of Christ” (Gal 6:2), and James called the love command “the royal law” (Jas 2:8) and “the perfect law of liberty” (1:25; 2:12).<\/p>\nThe word “commandment” had another meaning as well. Many Jews in Jesus’ day wrongly supposed that the commandments were given in order that men, by obeying them, could show themselves worthy of God’s blessing (Rom 8:3; Gal 3:2). Jesus made it clear, however, that love was a natural result of God’s blessing, not a necessary condition for it. For Jesus, the commandment expressed how one who is already living in the joy of God’s blessing should act. Disciples were commanded to love in the same sense that branches were “commanded” to bear fruit: the branch by abiding in the vine, the Christian by abiding in Christ (Jn 15:4).<\/p>\nWhat Made It New?<\/p>\nThe character of the new commandment comes from the “new covenant” (Jer 31:31-34; Lk 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25), which Jesus inaugurated at the Last Supper. Under the new covenant, God “writes” his law on the hearts of believers (Heb 10:16). That is, he actively works in them in the person of the Holy Spirit (Ez 36:27; 2 Cor 3:3), and gives them a new willingness to obey him (Rom 8:4; Gal 5:16). The new commandment of love is the all-embracing, single requirement of the new covenant (Rom 13:8, 10; Gal 5:14). Obedience, therefore, is a gift, because “love is from God; and every one who loves is born of God” (1 Jn 4:7, nasb<\/span>). It is the fruit of faith (3:23) and part of the gospel itself (v 11).<\/p>\nThe close relationship between the new covenant and the new commandment may explain partly why the command to love was called “new.” Christ’s incarnation inaugurated a new age. “The darkness is disappearing,” John wrote, “and the true light is already shining” (1 Jn 2:8, nlt<\/span>). Anticipating his ascension into heaven (Jn 13:33-35), Jesus left one inclusive commandment to preserve his disciples in the new age until its consummation at the Judgment Day (Jn 5:28-29; 1 Jn 4:17). Obedience to the new commandment was supposed to identify them as Jesus’ disciples during his absence (Jn 13:35; 17:21-23). The love command was thus new in the sense that it had a special function in the new age.<\/p>\nWhat made the age new was that Jesus Christ’s coming had revealed God the Father with an unprecedented and incomparable clarity (Jn 1:18; 10:30; 17:6-8). No prophet had ever been able to say, “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father” (14:9, niv<\/span>). Therefore Jesus’ demand that the disciples love each other “as I have loved you” (13:34) was, by every human standard, new and astonishing. No human had ever loved perfectly like Jesus (v 1). To follow his example of love, then, was a new commandment. The greatness of Jesus’ love moved him to “lay down his life for his friends” (15:13, niv<\/span>). Accordingly, John drew the conclusion that “we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers” (1 Jn 3:16, niv<\/span>). It follows that love means never shutting one’s heart against another Christian in need (v 17), but rather rejoicing to sacrifice one’s temporal good for another’s blessing.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Commandments, The Ten; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COMMANDMENT, The New<\/h3>\nChrist’s commandment for Christians to love each other. The phrase “new commandment” occurs four times in the NT, all in the writings of John (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:7, 8; 2 Jn 1:5). Initially, it was a command given by Jesus to his disciples on the night of his arrest: “I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other” (Jn 13:34, nlt<\/span>). The same command occurs elsewhere (Jn 15:12, 17; Rom 13:8; 1 Pt 1:22; 1 Jn 3:11, 23; 4:7, 11-12) but is not called “new” in those passages.<\/p>\nLove as a Commandment<\/p>\nJesus had already commanded his disciples to love their enemies (Mt 5:43-45) and to love their neighbors as themselves (Lk 10:25-37). The “new commandment” demanded that Christians love each other. In no sense did it overrule the other two love commands. Jesus’ command to love those within the church was intended to produce a compelling testimony to those outside the church. It would offer them demonstrable proof (1) that his followers were Christlike in their love toward one another; (2) that the basis for vital human community could be found “in Christ”; and (3) that, by extension, what Jesus said about himself and his work was really true (Jn 13:35; 17:21-23).<\/p>\nJesus chose the word used to describe the OT law, giving similar authority to his new commandment. In fact, the law included commands to love (Lv 19:18, 34; Dt 10:19). The apostle Paul thought of love as the “law of Christ” (Gal 6:2), and James called the love command “the royal law” (Jas 2:8) and “the perfect law of liberty” (1:25; 2:12).<\/p>\nThe word “commandment” had another meaning as well. Many Jews in Jesus’ day wrongly supposed that the commandments were given in order that men, by obeying them, could show themselves worthy of God’s blessing (Rom 8:3; Gal 3:2). Jesus made it clear, however, that love was a natural result of God’s blessing, not a necessary condition for it. For Jesus, the commandment expressed how one who is already living in the joy of God’s blessing should act. Disciples were commanded to love in the same sense that branches were “commanded” to bear fruit: the branch by abiding in the vine, the Christian by abiding in Christ (Jn 15:4).<\/p>\nWhat Made It New?<\/p>\nThe character of the new commandment comes from the “new covenant” (Jer 31:31-34; Lk 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25), which Jesus inaugurated at the Last Supper. Under the new covenant, God “writes” his law on the hearts of believers (Heb 10:16). That is, he actively works in them in the person of the Holy Spirit (Ez 36:27; 2 Cor 3:3), and gives them a new willingness to obey him (Rom 8:4; Gal 5:16). The new commandment of love is the all-embracing, single requirement of the new covenant (Rom 13:8, 10; Gal 5:14). Obedience, therefore, is a gift, because “love is from God; and every one who loves is born of God” (1 Jn 4:7, nasb<\/span>). It is the fruit of faith (3:23) and part of the gospel itself (v 11).<\/p>\nThe close relationship between the new covenant and the new commandment may explain partly why the command to love was called “new.” Christ’s incarnation inaugurated a new age. “The darkness is disappearing,” John wrote, “and the true light is already shining” (1 Jn 2:8, nlt<\/span>). Anticipating his ascension into heaven (Jn 13:33-35), Jesus left one inclusive commandment to preserve his disciples in the new age until its consummation at the Judgment Day (Jn 5:28-29; 1 Jn 4:17). Obedience to the new commandment was supposed to identify them as Jesus’ disciples during his absence (Jn 13:35; 17:21-23). The love command was thus new in the sense that it had a special function in the new age.<\/p>\nWhat made the age new was that Jesus Christ’s coming had revealed God the Father with an unprecedented and incomparable clarity (Jn 1:18; 10:30; 17:6-8). No prophet had ever been able to say, “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father” (14:9, niv<\/span>). Therefore Jesus’ demand that the disciples love each other “as I have loved you” (13:34) was, by every human standard, new and astonishing. No human had ever loved perfectly like Jesus (v 1). To follow his example of love, then, was a new commandment. The greatness of Jesus’ love moved him to “lay down his life for his friends” (15:13, niv<\/span>). Accordingly, John drew the conclusion that “we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers” (1 Jn 3:16, niv<\/span>). It follows that love means never shutting one’s heart against another Christian in need (v 17), but rather rejoicing to sacrifice one’s temporal good for another’s blessing.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Commandments, The Ten; Law, Biblical Concept of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COMMANDMENT, The New Christ’s commandment for Christians to love each other. The phrase “new commandment” occurs four times in the NT, all in the writings of John (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:7, 8; 2 Jn 1:5). Initially, it was a command given by Jesus to his disciples on the night of his arrest: “I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other” (Jn 13:34, nlt). The same command occurs elsewhere (Jn 15:12, 17; Rom 13:8; 1 Pt 1:22; 1 Jn 3:11, 23; 4:...","summary_en":"COMMANDMENT, The New Christ’s commandment for Christians to love each other. The phrase “new commandment” occurs four times in the NT, all in the writings of John (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:7, 8; 2 Jn 1:5). Initially, it was a command given by Jesus to his disciples on the night of his arrest: “I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other” (Jn 13:34, nlt). The same command occurs elsewhere (Jn 15:12, 17; Rom 13:8; 1 Pt 1:22; 1 Jn 3:11, 23; 4:...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7886,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covenant","title_en":"Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>COVENANT<\/h3>\nArrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings.<\/p>\nThe covenant theme in the OT is developed from Noah to Abraham and reaches its first climax in the covenant formed between God and Israel at Mt Sinai. After King David’s time, the history of the covenant becomes a less prominent theme.<\/p>\nAt a low point in covenant history the Bible introduces the prophet Jeremiah’s prophecy of a “new covenant” in Israel’s future. Christians believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy eventually found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is not accidental that the two volumes of the Christian Bible have been called the Old Covenant and New Covenant (the word commonly translated “testament” means “covenant”).<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n• Human Covenants<\/p>\n• Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n• Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n• The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n• The Covenant with David<\/p>\n• The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\nThe essence of covenant is to be found in a particular kind of relationship between persons. Mutual obligations characterize that kind of relationship. Thus a covenant relationship is not merely a mutual acquaintance but a commitment to responsibility and action. A key word in Scripture to describe that commitment is “faithfulness,” acted out in a context of abiding friendship.<\/p>\nIn the OT the word “covenant” was used in an ordinary human sense as well as in a theological sense. An understanding of human covenants provides a starting point for understanding the covenant between God and human beings.<\/p>\nHuman Covenants<\/p>\nA variety of human relationships, from profoundly personal to distantly political, may be described as covenantal. The deep brotherly love that David and Jonathan shared led to a formal covenant between them (1 Sm 18:3). Their covenant of friendship was more than a token of esteem; it bound them to demonstrate mutual loyalty and loving-kindness in certain tangible ways. Jonathan’s covenant faithfulness was typified on an occasion when David was out of favor with the king; Jonathan braved his father’s wrath to speak favorably for his friend. Subsequently, he warned David secretly to flee into hiding (1 Sm 19–20).<\/p>\nTo appreciate the many OT laws on marriage and divorce, one must understand that marriage itself was a covenant relationship (Mal 2:14). The solemn promises exchanged by a man and woman became their covenant obligations. Faithfulness to those promises brought marital blessing (cf. Ps 128; Prv 18:22); violation brought a curse.<\/p>\nAn individual could, at least figuratively, make a covenant or vow with himself or herself (something like a New Year’s resolution). Job, arguing his integrity before God, referred to a covenant he had made with his eyes to keep him from looking at women licentiously (Jb 31:1).<\/p>\nCovenants could also have a national or international character. The elders of Israel made a national covenant with King David in Hebron (2 Sm 5:3). Probably it contained explicit promises both from the elders on behalf of the people to submit themselves to the king’s authority and from David to rule the nation justly and according to the law of God (Dt 17:15-20). The covenant relationship described mutual obligations between a senior partner (the king) and junior partners (the Israelites). In international relationships OT covenants were similar to modern treaties or alliances. King Solomon entered into such a covenant with Hiram, king of Tyre; that covenant, like many modern international treaties, was a trade agreement between the two nations (1 Kgs 5:12).<\/p>\nCovenant is thus an interpersonal framework of trust, responsibilities, and benefits, with broad application to almost every human relationship from personal friendship to international trade agreements. In Scripture covenant is also the most comprehensive concept covering an individual’s relationship to God.<\/p>\nDivine-Human Covenants<\/p>\nThe same basic characteristics of a strictly human covenant are present in a divine covenant: (1) a relationship between two parties (God and a human being or nation), and (2) mutual obligations between the covenant partners. To the OT believer, religion meant covenant. OT religion was faithfulness to the covenant relationship between God and his chosen people; religious responsibilities for both the faith and practice of Israel were covenant responsibilities.<\/p>\nThe concept of a divine-human covenant in the OT was not static. Although the fundamental character of covenant remains the same throughout the Bible, the specific nature and form of the covenant changed and developed in the course of ancient Israel’s history. A brief survey of covenant history will further clarify its dimensions.<\/p>\nBeginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<h5>Adam<\/h5>\nAdam and Eve were placed in the Garden. God was their Creator; they were his creatures. The meaning of their lives was to be found in relationship with each other and with God, the giver of the Garden. The fall, however, brought a disruption of the divine relationship, and they were expelled from the Garden.<\/p>\nThe fall substantially influenced the nature of subsequent religious covenants. The separation of humankind from God clarifies the nature of the human predicament. Created for a relationship with the Creator, sinning humans are excluded from that relationship and cannot, on their own accord, reestablish it. From that circumstance emerges a distinctive feature of divine-human covenants, namely, that God alone can initiate the relationship of covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>Noah<\/h5>\nThe first explicit mention of covenant in Scripture refers to the initiative taken by God to bind himself again to human beings in a covenant, despite human faithlessness. When God warned Noah to build an ark in order to escape the impending Flood, he also promised to establish a covenant with him (Gn 6:18). The corruption and violence of the human race had provoked God’s anger, but his grace was shown in his dealings with Noah. The promised covenant provided that God would maintain a relationship with one family, even though other divine-human relationships were being formally severed. Significantly, God’s covenant promise to Noah came in a context of demand: God ordered Noah to build an ark (v 14). Noah’s receipt of the covenant blessing depended on his obedience to a divine command.<\/p>\nThe covenant was elaborated only after the Flood, when Noah had made an offering to God (Gn 8:20-22). The covenant with Noah was in fact a universal covenant with humankind and all living creatures (9:8-10). God promised never to send such a flood again as judgment on the world. The sign of that covenant was the rainbow.<\/p>\nThe covenant with Noah affords some perspective for understanding the “covenant God.” Although human beings may deserve destruction because of their wickedness, God withholds that destruction. The covenant of Noah did not establish an intimate relationship between God and each living being; nevertheless, it left open the possibility of a more intimate covenant. Human beings, in spite of their evil, are allowed for a time to live in God’s world; during those years, they may seek a deeper relationship with that world’s Creator.<\/p>\n<h5>Abraham<\/h5>\nThe first explicit reference to God’s covenant with Abraham is in Genesis 15. When the Lord called the 75-year-old Abram (as he was first called) to leave his home city of Ur and set out on a journey, a relationship already existed between God and Abram. In that relationship, which enabled God to command Abram’s obedience, God made certain promises to him: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gn 12:2, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nFormal establishment of the covenant with Abram is described in Genesis 15 as a profound religious experience. The initiative lay entirely with God, who approached Abram in a vision and spoke with him. Abram raised a fundamental objection: how could he experience the blessing of God if it was to come to him through a son he did not have? His wife Sarai was past the childbearing age, and he himself was “as good as dead” (Rom 4:19). God assured the old man that he would have a son through whom his descendants would eventually be as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abram’s belief at that point introduced the theme of righteousness central to the covenant concept: Abram “believed the Lord<\/span>, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6, rsv<\/span>). At the end of that day, Abram knew that his own future and the future of his descendants were firmly in the hands of the covenant God. “On that day the Lord<\/span> made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I give this land’ ” (v 18, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe covenant is more fully expressed in Genesis 17, which probably records a renewal of God’s covenant with Abram. The initiative once again lay with God (Gn 17:1). God addressed the 99-year-old Abram in words that made clear that the covenant was not a relationship between equal partners. God was the Almighty; Abram was a human being to whom an extraordinary privilege had been granted.<\/p>\nYet the details of the covenant in Genesis 17 show that both partners assumed responsibilities. God committed himself voluntarily to Abram and his descendants while requiring certain commitments from Abram. The blessing Abram would receive as a covenant partner became clear from the new name God gave him. “I am changing your name. It will no longer be Abram; now you will be known as Abraham, for you will be the father of many nations” (Gn 17:5, nlt<\/span>). God would give to Abraham, through his descendants, the land of Canaan as an everlasting gift and would be the personal God of Abraham and his family in perpetuity (vv 7-8).<\/p>\nGod’s giving required a response of obedience from Abraham: “Live a blameless life” (Gn 17:1, nlt<\/span>). Those simple words indicate the essence of covenant relationship: to relate to God is to live in his presence; since God is holy, one who knows him is expected to live a life of integrity and blamelessness.<\/p>\nThe covenant also had a more formal aspect. Abraham and the male members of his household were to undergo the rite of circumcision as a symbol of covenant commitment. Abraham was an old man when he was circumcised (Gn 17:24), though male children born into the covenant family were to be circumcised when they were eight days old (v 12). Circumcision was not in itself a ritual peculiar to the Hebrews; it was practiced in most societies in the ancient Near East (the Philistines were one exception). The distinctiveness lay in what the act symbolized: among other things, a continuing and faithful relationship with the living God.<\/p>\nGod’s covenant with Abraham was characterized by both present and future realities. The covenant established a continuing relationship between Abraham and his Creator. Yet its thrust pointed to future blessing—in the children yet to be born, the “chosen people,” and in the land that eventually his descendants would call their own.<\/p>\nAnother dimension of the covenant lay still further in the future: “All the families of the earth will be blessed through you” (Gn 12:3, nlt<\/span>). Early in the OT, the idea of election (God’s unconditional preference; cf. 2 Thes 2:13) is present. God chose to enter into a covenant relationship with a particular man and his particular descendants. Yet God always elects a person to serve: Adam, to cultivate the Garden; Noah, to build an ark; Abraham, to leave his home for another land and to live blamelessly before God (cf. Eph 2:8-10). Further, the “particularity” of Abraham’s election contained within it a universality: through his descendants the blessing of God would be offered to all.<\/p>\nThus, the future aspects of Abraham’s covenant reflect two stages. From Abraham’s perspective, in the relatively near future his descendants would possess a land given them by God. But in the more distant future was the prospect of a universal blessing, the culmination of God’s work in the world. The initial fulfillment of that distant future is perceived in the NT, but the more immediate fulfillment of God’s promise was the Sinai covenant at the time of Moses.<\/p>\nThe Sinai Covenant<\/p>\nThe covenant established between God and Israel at Mt Sinai is the focal point of the covenant tradition in the OT. It was anticipated in the covenant of Abraham and lay behind the covenant of David and the proclamation of the prophets. It was central to OT religion, laying down the foundations of Judaism that continue into the modern world. The Sinai covenant was the formal institution of a relationship between God and his chosen people, Israel.<\/p>\nIn order to appreciate the impact of the Sinai covenant, one must understand its historical context. It was preceded by the exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. The exodus was an extraordinary act of liberation in which God intervened in the normal course of history to free his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus is interpreted in the OT as a divine act comparable to Creation, the act through which God “created” the nation of Israel. Examination of the two versions of the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15) shows that the exodus from Egypt directly parallels the creation of the world as a basis for Sabbath observance. Although Israel was created in the exodus, the nation had neither a constitution nor land. The covenant provided the nascent state of Israel with a constitution, making it a theocratic state (a state ruled by God).<\/p>\nThe basic account of the Sinai covenant is contained in Exodus 19 and 20. The initiative came from God, who gave instructions through Moses to prepare for the covenant; God spoke the words that contained the covenant offer. There was no doubt that the God of Israel was the senior partner in the relationship made formal at Sinai. The God who had revealed himself through his acts in the exodus then revealed himself in words. Those two aspects—the God who acts and speaks—are central to OT theology. And although the covenant contained law, it was preceded by the exodus, an act of divine grace.<\/p>\nGod’s offer of covenant carried with it a divine promise: “You will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:6, nlt<\/span>). The promise was one of extraordinary privilege; an entire nation was called upon to represent all other nations before the God of the universe. But the priestly office, though it carried privilege, was also a demanding office. A priest had to be pure and had to know the God whose presence he was required to enter. Thus Israel, the priestly nation, received a law that would provide direction in living, in loving God, and in serving all people. The law given with the covenant expressed the requirements for God’s covenant people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Covenant Law<\/h5>\nThe covenant law had two principal parts. First, the Ten Commandments expressed God’s requirements of Israel in a concise form (Ex 20:2-17). The commandments specified the covenant people’s relationship both to God and to other human beings. Although the tendency in the present day is to view the Ten Commandments as a system of ethics or morality, they had a different role in ancient Israel. The covenant law was the foundation or constitution of a new nation, a special “nation of priests.” The head of the nation-state was God. Hence, in ancient Israel the status of the Ten Commandments was approximately that of the code of criminal law in a modern nation-state. To break one of those laws was to commit a crime against God, the head of the state. Yet the laws had a positive purpose. They set down a way of life that would result in a full and rich communion with God and community with others.<\/p>\nThe second part of the covenant law was a detailed law code covering the activities of everyday life. Examples of such laws are found in Exodus 21–23. These laws were compiled and recorded in the “Book of the Covenant” (Ex 24:7). Although many laws were contained in this book, it was impossible to codify every aspect of human behavior. The diversity of the examples given indicates that for the covenant member no area of human life was beyond the influence of the covenant. Persons who entered into a relationship with God entered into a relationship that impinged on every possible aspect of their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Renewal<\/h5>\nThe covenant at Sinai was made with a particular group of people under the leadership of Moses but was binding on future generations. Consequently, the covenant was renewed from time to time. Covenant renewals are recorded in the time of Joshua (Jos 8:30-35; 24:1-28) and, much later, during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:1-3).<\/p>\nThe most important passage in the Bible for understanding covenant renewal and the nature of covenant is the book of Deuteronomy. The entire book describes a particular covenant renewal ceremony that occurred at a critical juncture in Israel’s early history. The Sinai covenant was renewed just before Moses’ death, before the transition of leadership to Joshua, and before a major military campaign to possess the Promised Land.<\/p>\nThe covenant since the time of Abraham had contained a promise of land. Immediately before they entered that land (c. 1250 BC<\/span>), the covenant vows were renewed with a new generation of Israelites, most of whom had not stood at the foot of Mt Sinai some 40 years earlier. Although covenant renewal is the central theme of Deuteronomy, the writer focused primarily on Moses’ sermon rather than on a detailed account of the renewal ceremony.<\/p>\nMany aspects of the ceremony were simply a repetition of what happened at the original ratification of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were repeated (Dt 5:6-21), and the laws of the Book of the Covenant were expounded in greater detail (Dt 12–26). Two points emerging in Deuteronomy are particularly significant for an understanding of covenant: a clear statement of covenant love and a detailed statement of the blessings and curses that accompanied the making and renewing of the covenant.<\/p>\nThe Covenant with David<\/p>\nThe covenant tradition underwent modification during the time of King David (c. 1000 BC<\/span>). The Sinai covenant had been established between God and Israel, with Moses acting as mediator. In David’s time an additional element was added: God entered into a covenant with David as king. That royal covenant was intimated to David through the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:8-16), indicating once again the divine initiative. It was to be an everlasting covenant with David’s royal lineage (23:5).<\/p>\n\nChristians generally interpret the covenant with David as a messianic covenant. For several centuries the dynasty established by David ruled a united Israel, then ruled the remaining southern kingdom of Judah. But in 586 BC<\/span> Judah was conquered by the Babylonians. At that point a descendant of David was no longer ruling an independent kingdom of God’s chosen people. The everlasting nature of the covenant with David was brought out, however, not in the pages of ancient history but in the expectation of a Messiah who would be born of David’s descendants. Matthew and Luke both pointed to Jesus’ Davidic descent (Mt 1:1; Lk 3:31). The NT thus extends the covenant acts of God into the new age in the person of Jesus.<\/p>\nThe New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\nAlthough David’s covenant with God was eternal, in a sense the covenant established with Israel on Mt Sinai was temporal. The Sinai covenant included conditional clauses, stated in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy. Israel’s disobedience of the covenant law would at worst bring exile from the Promised Land, a central covenant theme from Abraham to Moses and beyond.<\/p>\nThe Hebrew prophets often perceived the danger of an end to the covenant as a result of Israel’s sins. Some of the prophets, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, also perceived a deeper truth; namely, that the covenant was rooted in divine love and that therefore even the curse of God could not be final.<\/p>\nHosea dramatically expressed that truth through the “living parable” of his marriage (Hos 1–3). He married Gomer at God’s command, but later, as a result of her unfaithfulness, the marital covenant was dissolved by divorce. Although Gomer’s adulterous acts compelled Hosea to divorce her, he did not cease to love her. God later commanded Hosea to go back to Gomer (Hos 3:1). Despite her unfaithfulness, the prophet was to take her again into the covenant relationship of marriage. That acted-out parable depicted God’s actions with Israel. Israel’s sin would inevitably culminate in a divorce from God, but Hosea perceived a new marriage. In the new covenant between God and Israel, Israel would be graciously accepted back into a relationship with God (2:14-18).<\/p>\nThe new covenant is given powerful expression in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries BC<\/span>. In his lifetime Jeremiah saw the kingdom of Judah defeated in war. The nation lost its independence and became a vassal of the Babylonian Empire. In an external sense, that defeat in 586 BC<\/span> marked the end of the Sinai covenant. Israel could no longer call the Promised Land its own. Yet Jeremiah perceived a truth beyond the contemporary political realities. God’s work in the world, like his love for the world, was not over.<\/p>\nThus Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant that God would bring into effect: “The days are coming, says the Lord<\/span>, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31, rsv<\/span>). The new covenant would be marked by an act of God within human hearts, a radical spiritual transformation (Jer 31:34). At the Last Supper Jesus declared to his disciples that “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20, rsv<\/span>). To the writer of Hebrews, the new covenant was central to a full understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ (Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>\nConclusion<\/p>\nCovenant is a concept central to the message and the history of the OT. The covenant theme continues into the NT as a way of interpreting the Christian gospel. Meaning in human life is to be found in a covenant relationship with the living God. Yet sinful human beings cannot work their way into such a relationship; God alone can initiate it. According to the NT, God’s act in giving his son, Jesus, to die opened up the covenant relationship to all human beings. The forgiveness made available by Jesus’ “blood of the new covenant” makes it possible for any individual to enter into a covenant relationship with God. Entry into such a relationship, today as in Abraham’s time, hinges upon faith (Gal 3:6-14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Alliance; Covenant, The New; Law, Biblical Concept of; Oath; Vows.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVENANT<\/h3>\nArrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings.<\/p>\nThe covenant theme in the OT is developed from Noah to Abraham and reaches its first climax in the covenant formed between God and Israel at Mt Sinai. After King David’s time, the history of the covenant becomes a less prominent theme.<\/p>\nAt a low point in covenant history the Bible introduces the prophet Jeremiah’s prophecy of a “new covenant” in Israel’s future. Christians believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy eventually found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is not accidental that the two volumes of the Christian Bible have been called the Old Covenant and New Covenant (the word commonly translated “testament” means “covenant”).<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n• Human Covenants<\/p>\n• Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n• Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n• The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n• The Covenant with David<\/p>\n• The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\nThe essence of covenant is to be found in a particular kind of relationship between persons. Mutual obligations characterize that kind of relationship. Thus a covenant relationship is not merely a mutual acquaintance but a commitment to responsibility and action. A key word in Scripture to describe that commitment is “faithfulness,” acted out in a context of abiding friendship.<\/p>\nIn the OT the word “covenant” was used in an ordinary human sense as well as in a theological sense. An understanding of human covenants provides a starting point for understanding the covenant between God and human beings.<\/p>\nHuman Covenants<\/p>\nA variety of human relationships, from profoundly personal to distantly political, may be described as covenantal. The deep brotherly love that David and Jonathan shared led to a formal covenant between them (1 Sm 18:3). Their covenant of friendship was more than a token of esteem; it bound them to demonstrate mutual loyalty and loving-kindness in certain tangible ways. Jonathan’s covenant faithfulness was typified on an occasion when David was out of favor with the king; Jonathan braved his father’s wrath to speak favorably for his friend. Subsequently, he warned David secretly to flee into hiding (1 Sm 19–20).<\/p>\nTo appreciate the many OT laws on marriage and divorce, one must understand that marriage itself was a covenant relationship (Mal 2:14). The solemn promises exchanged by a man and woman became their covenant obligations. Faithfulness to those promises brought marital blessing (cf. Ps 128; Prv 18:22); violation brought a curse.<\/p>\nAn individual could, at least figuratively, make a covenant or vow with himself or herself (something like a New Year’s resolution). Job, arguing his integrity before God, referred to a covenant he had made with his eyes to keep him from looking at women licentiously (Jb 31:1).<\/p>\nCovenants could also have a national or international character. The elders of Israel made a national covenant with King David in Hebron (2 Sm 5:3). Probably it contained explicit promises both from the elders on behalf of the people to submit themselves to the king’s authority and from David to rule the nation justly and according to the law of God (Dt 17:15-20). The covenant relationship described mutual obligations between a senior partner (the king) and junior partners (the Israelites). In international relationships OT covenants were similar to modern treaties or alliances. King Solomon entered into such a covenant with Hiram, king of Tyre; that covenant, like many modern international treaties, was a trade agreement between the two nations (1 Kgs 5:12).<\/p>\nCovenant is thus an interpersonal framework of trust, responsibilities, and benefits, with broad application to almost every human relationship from personal friendship to international trade agreements. In Scripture covenant is also the most comprehensive concept covering an individual’s relationship to God.<\/p>\nDivine-Human Covenants<\/p>\nThe same basic characteristics of a strictly human covenant are present in a divine covenant: (1) a relationship between two parties (God and a human being or nation), and (2) mutual obligations between the covenant partners. To the OT believer, religion meant covenant. OT religion was faithfulness to the covenant relationship between God and his chosen people; religious responsibilities for both the faith and practice of Israel were covenant responsibilities.<\/p>\nThe concept of a divine-human covenant in the OT was not static. Although the fundamental character of covenant remains the same throughout the Bible, the specific nature and form of the covenant changed and developed in the course of ancient Israel’s history. A brief survey of covenant history will further clarify its dimensions.<\/p>\nBeginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<h5>Adam<\/h5>\nAdam and Eve were placed in the Garden. God was their Creator; they were his creatures. The meaning of their lives was to be found in relationship with each other and with God, the giver of the Garden. The fall, however, brought a disruption of the divine relationship, and they were expelled from the Garden.<\/p>\nThe fall substantially influenced the nature of subsequent religious covenants. The separation of humankind from God clarifies the nature of the human predicament. Created for a relationship with the Creator, sinning humans are excluded from that relationship and cannot, on their own accord, reestablish it. From that circumstance emerges a distinctive feature of divine-human covenants, namely, that God alone can initiate the relationship of covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>Noah<\/h5>\nThe first explicit mention of covenant in Scripture refers to the initiative taken by God to bind himself again to human beings in a covenant, despite human faithlessness. When God warned Noah to build an ark in order to escape the impending Flood, he also promised to establish a covenant with him (Gn 6:18). The corruption and violence of the human race had provoked God’s anger, but his grace was shown in his dealings with Noah. The promised covenant provided that God would maintain a relationship with one family, even though other divine-human relationships were being formally severed. Significantly, God’s covenant promise to Noah came in a context of demand: God ordered Noah to build an ark (v 14). Noah’s receipt of the covenant blessing depended on his obedience to a divine command.<\/p>\nThe covenant was elaborated only after the Flood, when Noah had made an offering to God (Gn 8:20-22). The covenant with Noah was in fact a universal covenant with humankind and all living creatures (9:8-10). God promised never to send such a flood again as judgment on the world. The sign of that covenant was the rainbow.<\/p>\nThe covenant with Noah affords some perspective for understanding the “covenant God.” Although human beings may deserve destruction because of their wickedness, God withholds that destruction. The covenant of Noah did not establish an intimate relationship between God and each living being; nevertheless, it left open the possibility of a more intimate covenant. Human beings, in spite of their evil, are allowed for a time to live in God’s world; during those years, they may seek a deeper relationship with that world’s Creator.<\/p>\n<h5>Abraham<\/h5>\nThe first explicit reference to God’s covenant with Abraham is in Genesis 15. When the Lord called the 75-year-old Abram (as he was first called) to leave his home city of Ur and set out on a journey, a relationship already existed between God and Abram. In that relationship, which enabled God to command Abram’s obedience, God made certain promises to him: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gn 12:2, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nFormal establishment of the covenant with Abram is described in Genesis 15 as a profound religious experience. The initiative lay entirely with God, who approached Abram in a vision and spoke with him. Abram raised a fundamental objection: how could he experience the blessing of God if it was to come to him through a son he did not have? His wife Sarai was past the childbearing age, and he himself was “as good as dead” (Rom 4:19). God assured the old man that he would have a son through whom his descendants would eventually be as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abram’s belief at that point introduced the theme of righteousness central to the covenant concept: Abram “believed the Lord<\/span>, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6, rsv<\/span>). At the end of that day, Abram knew that his own future and the future of his descendants were firmly in the hands of the covenant God. “On that day the Lord<\/span> made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I give this land’ ” (v 18, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe covenant is more fully expressed in Genesis 17, which probably records a renewal of God’s covenant with Abram. The initiative once again lay with God (Gn 17:1). God addressed the 99-year-old Abram in words that made clear that the covenant was not a relationship between equal partners. God was the Almighty; Abram was a human being to whom an extraordinary privilege had been granted.<\/p>\nYet the details of the covenant in Genesis 17 show that both partners assumed responsibilities. God committed himself voluntarily to Abram and his descendants while requiring certain commitments from Abram. The blessing Abram would receive as a covenant partner became clear from the new name God gave him. “I am changing your name. It will no longer be Abram; now you will be known as Abraham, for you will be the father of many nations” (Gn 17:5, nlt<\/span>). God would give to Abraham, through his descendants, the land of Canaan as an everlasting gift and would be the personal God of Abraham and his family in perpetuity (vv 7-8).<\/p>\nGod’s giving required a response of obedience from Abraham: “Live a blameless life” (Gn 17:1, nlt<\/span>). Those simple words indicate the essence of covenant relationship: to relate to God is to live in his presence; since God is holy, one who knows him is expected to live a life of integrity and blamelessness.<\/p>\nThe covenant also had a more formal aspect. Abraham and the male members of his household were to undergo the rite of circumcision as a symbol of covenant commitment. Abraham was an old man when he was circumcised (Gn 17:24), though male children born into the covenant family were to be circumcised when they were eight days old (v 12). Circumcision was not in itself a ritual peculiar to the Hebrews; it was practiced in most societies in the ancient Near East (the Philistines were one exception). The distinctiveness lay in what the act symbolized: among other things, a continuing and faithful relationship with the living God.<\/p>\nGod’s covenant with Abraham was characterized by both present and future realities. The covenant established a continuing relationship between Abraham and his Creator. Yet its thrust pointed to future blessing—in the children yet to be born, the “chosen people,” and in the land that eventually his descendants would call their own.<\/p>\nAnother dimension of the covenant lay still further in the future: “All the families of the earth will be blessed through you” (Gn 12:3, nlt<\/span>). Early in the OT, the idea of election (God’s unconditional preference; cf. 2 Thes 2:13) is present. God chose to enter into a covenant relationship with a particular man and his particular descendants. Yet God always elects a person to serve: Adam, to cultivate the Garden; Noah, to build an ark; Abraham, to leave his home for another land and to live blamelessly before God (cf. Eph 2:8-10). Further, the “particularity” of Abraham’s election contained within it a universality: through his descendants the blessing of God would be offered to all.<\/p>\nThus, the future aspects of Abraham’s covenant reflect two stages. From Abraham’s perspective, in the relatively near future his descendants would possess a land given them by God. But in the more distant future was the prospect of a universal blessing, the culmination of God’s work in the world. The initial fulfillment of that distant future is perceived in the NT, but the more immediate fulfillment of God’s promise was the Sinai covenant at the time of Moses.<\/p>\nThe Sinai Covenant<\/p>\nThe covenant established between God and Israel at Mt Sinai is the focal point of the covenant tradition in the OT. It was anticipated in the covenant of Abraham and lay behind the covenant of David and the proclamation of the prophets. It was central to OT religion, laying down the foundations of Judaism that continue into the modern world. The Sinai covenant was the formal institution of a relationship between God and his chosen people, Israel.<\/p>\nIn order to appreciate the impact of the Sinai covenant, one must understand its historical context. It was preceded by the exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. The exodus was an extraordinary act of liberation in which God intervened in the normal course of history to free his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus is interpreted in the OT as a divine act comparable to Creation, the act through which God “created” the nation of Israel. Examination of the two versions of the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15) shows that the exodus from Egypt directly parallels the creation of the world as a basis for Sabbath observance. Although Israel was created in the exodus, the nation had neither a constitution nor land. The covenant provided the nascent state of Israel with a constitution, making it a theocratic state (a state ruled by God).<\/p>\nThe basic account of the Sinai covenant is contained in Exodus 19 and 20. The initiative came from God, who gave instructions through Moses to prepare for the covenant; God spoke the words that contained the covenant offer. There was no doubt that the God of Israel was the senior partner in the relationship made formal at Sinai. The God who had revealed himself through his acts in the exodus then revealed himself in words. Those two aspects—the God who acts and speaks—are central to OT theology. And although the covenant contained law, it was preceded by the exodus, an act of divine grace.<\/p>\nGod’s offer of covenant carried with it a divine promise: “You will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:6, nlt<\/span>). The promise was one of extraordinary privilege; an entire nation was called upon to represent all other nations before the God of the universe. But the priestly office, though it carried privilege, was also a demanding office. A priest had to be pure and had to know the God whose presence he was required to enter. Thus Israel, the priestly nation, received a law that would provide direction in living, in loving God, and in serving all people. The law given with the covenant expressed the requirements for God’s covenant people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Covenant Law<\/h5>\nThe covenant law had two principal parts. First, the Ten Commandments expressed God’s requirements of Israel in a concise form (Ex 20:2-17). The commandments specified the covenant people’s relationship both to God and to other human beings. Although the tendency in the present day is to view the Ten Commandments as a system of ethics or morality, they had a different role in ancient Israel. The covenant law was the foundation or constitution of a new nation, a special “nation of priests.” The head of the nation-state was God. Hence, in ancient Israel the status of the Ten Commandments was approximately that of the code of criminal law in a modern nation-state. To break one of those laws was to commit a crime against God, the head of the state. Yet the laws had a positive purpose. They set down a way of life that would result in a full and rich communion with God and community with others.<\/p>\nThe second part of the covenant law was a detailed law code covering the activities of everyday life. Examples of such laws are found in Exodus 21–23. These laws were compiled and recorded in the “Book of the Covenant” (Ex 24:7). Although many laws were contained in this book, it was impossible to codify every aspect of human behavior. The diversity of the examples given indicates that for the covenant member no area of human life was beyond the influence of the covenant. Persons who entered into a relationship with God entered into a relationship that impinged on every possible aspect of their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Renewal<\/h5>\nThe covenant at Sinai was made with a particular group of people under the leadership of Moses but was binding on future generations. Consequently, the covenant was renewed from time to time. Covenant renewals are recorded in the time of Joshua (Jos 8:30-35; 24:1-28) and, much later, during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:1-3).<\/p>\nThe most important passage in the Bible for understanding covenant renewal and the nature of covenant is the book of Deuteronomy. The entire book describes a particular covenant renewal ceremony that occurred at a critical juncture in Israel’s early history. The Sinai covenant was renewed just before Moses’ death, before the transition of leadership to Joshua, and before a major military campaign to possess the Promised Land.<\/p>\nThe covenant since the time of Abraham had contained a promise of land. Immediately before they entered that land (c. 1250 BC<\/span>), the covenant vows were renewed with a new generation of Israelites, most of whom had not stood at the foot of Mt Sinai some 40 years earlier. Although covenant renewal is the central theme of Deuteronomy, the writer focused primarily on Moses’ sermon rather than on a detailed account of the renewal ceremony.<\/p>\nMany aspects of the ceremony were simply a repetition of what happened at the original ratification of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were repeated (Dt 5:6-21), and the laws of the Book of the Covenant were expounded in greater detail (Dt 12–26). Two points emerging in Deuteronomy are particularly significant for an understanding of covenant: a clear statement of covenant love and a detailed statement of the blessings and curses that accompanied the making and renewing of the covenant.<\/p>\nThe Covenant with David<\/p>\nThe covenant tradition underwent modification during the time of King David (c. 1000 BC<\/span>). The Sinai covenant had been established between God and Israel, with Moses acting as mediator. In David’s time an additional element was added: God entered into a covenant with David as king. That royal covenant was intimated to David through the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:8-16), indicating once again the divine initiative. It was to be an everlasting covenant with David’s royal lineage (23:5).<\/p>\n\nChristians generally interpret the covenant with David as a messianic covenant. For several centuries the dynasty established by David ruled a united Israel, then ruled the remaining southern kingdom of Judah. But in 586 BC<\/span> Judah was conquered by the Babylonians. At that point a descendant of David was no longer ruling an independent kingdom of God’s chosen people. The everlasting nature of the covenant with David was brought out, however, not in the pages of ancient history but in the expectation of a Messiah who would be born of David’s descendants. Matthew and Luke both pointed to Jesus’ Davidic descent (Mt 1:1; Lk 3:31). The NT thus extends the covenant acts of God into the new age in the person of Jesus.<\/p>\nThe New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\nAlthough David’s covenant with God was eternal, in a sense the covenant established with Israel on Mt Sinai was temporal. The Sinai covenant included conditional clauses, stated in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy. Israel’s disobedience of the covenant law would at worst bring exile from the Promised Land, a central covenant theme from Abraham to Moses and beyond.<\/p>\nThe Hebrew prophets often perceived the danger of an end to the covenant as a result of Israel’s sins. Some of the prophets, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, also perceived a deeper truth; namely, that the covenant was rooted in divine love and that therefore even the curse of God could not be final.<\/p>\nHosea dramatically expressed that truth through the “living parable” of his marriage (Hos 1–3). He married Gomer at God’s command, but later, as a result of her unfaithfulness, the marital covenant was dissolved by divorce. Although Gomer’s adulterous acts compelled Hosea to divorce her, he did not cease to love her. God later commanded Hosea to go back to Gomer (Hos 3:1). Despite her unfaithfulness, the prophet was to take her again into the covenant relationship of marriage. That acted-out parable depicted God’s actions with Israel. Israel’s sin would inevitably culminate in a divorce from God, but Hosea perceived a new marriage. In the new covenant between God and Israel, Israel would be graciously accepted back into a relationship with God (2:14-18).<\/p>\nThe new covenant is given powerful expression in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries BC<\/span>. In his lifetime Jeremiah saw the kingdom of Judah defeated in war. The nation lost its independence and became a vassal of the Babylonian Empire. In an external sense, that defeat in 586 BC<\/span> marked the end of the Sinai covenant. Israel could no longer call the Promised Land its own. Yet Jeremiah perceived a truth beyond the contemporary political realities. God’s work in the world, like his love for the world, was not over.<\/p>\nThus Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant that God would bring into effect: “The days are coming, says the Lord<\/span>, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31, rsv<\/span>). The new covenant would be marked by an act of God within human hearts, a radical spiritual transformation (Jer 31:34). At the Last Supper Jesus declared to his disciples that “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20, rsv<\/span>). To the writer of Hebrews, the new covenant was central to a full understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ (Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>\nConclusion<\/p>\nCovenant is a concept central to the message and the history of the OT. The covenant theme continues into the NT as a way of interpreting the Christian gospel. Meaning in human life is to be found in a covenant relationship with the living God. Yet sinful human beings cannot work their way into such a relationship; God alone can initiate it. According to the NT, God’s act in giving his son, Jesus, to die opened up the covenant relationship to all human beings. The forgiveness made available by Jesus’ “blood of the new covenant” makes it possible for any individual to enter into a covenant relationship with God. Entry into such a relationship, today as in Abraham’s time, hinges upon faith (Gal 3:6-14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Alliance; Covenant, The New; Law, Biblical Concept of; Oath; Vows.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVENANT Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings. The covenant theme in the OT is developed from...","summary_en":"COVENANT Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings. The covenant theme in the OT is developed from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7895,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covenant, the New","title_en":"Covenant, the New","content_ro":"<h3>COVENANT, The New<\/h3>\nA gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT.<\/p>\nAlthough the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremiah saw God making with Israel “after those days” (vv 32-34) with the covenant God had made with his people in the days of Moses. The contrast is seen, first of all, in the internal nature of the new covenant. Whereas the old covenant was written on tablets of stone (Ex 31:18; 34:27-32; Dt 4:13; 5:22; 9:11; 10:3-4) and in a book (Ex 24:7; cf. the phrase “old written code,” Rom 7:6, rsv<\/span>), the new covenant is to be written on the human heart. One result is a clearer revelation of what God demands; another is the enablement of believers to fulfill those demands (see Rom 8:2-4). The interior nature of the new covenant is spoken of in several other passages (Ez 11:19-21; 36:26-27) and made explicit in the prophet Joel of a time when God “will pour out [his] spirit on all flesh” (Jl 2:28-32).<\/p>\nA second contrast is in the way God’s people know him under the two covenants. There is no doubt that Israel under the old covenant “knew” God; God had revealed himself, though at times the nation tended to forget this (Jgs 2:10; Hos 4:1, 6). What the prophets envisioned in the new covenant is a unique personal knowledge of God by each individual member of the covenant community.<\/p>\nFinally, the two covenants differ in regard to God’s dealing with human sin. Jeremiah promised that God would forgive the iniquity of his people and blot out their sin. Israel already knew that God delighted in mercy and forgiveness (Ex 34:6-7), but Jeremiah was saying that God would never again remember their sin (Jer 31:34). Under the old covenant there was a reminder of sin year after year (Heb 10:3); under the new covenant no remembrance of sin remains (v 14).<\/p>\nA New Covenant<\/p>\nThe expression “new covenant” is found at least six times in the NT (1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:8, 13; 9:15; 12:24; and probably Lk 22:20, according to some manuscripts). In certain Greek manuscripts the phrase is also found in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, where “new” seems to have been added by various scribes to “blood of the covenant,” in order to make these accounts conform to parallel accounts of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians or possibly in Luke.<\/p>\nEven though the term “new” is not found in the accounts in Matthew and Mark in the best Greek manuscripts, and was therefore probably not part of the original text, it is clear from all four accounts that Jesus saw the Lord’s Supper as instituting a different and therefore “new” covenant. The covenant was being sealed by his sacrificial death, that is, by his blood, just as the Mosaic covenant was sealed by the “blood of the covenant” (Ex 24:6-8). The cup of the Lord’s Supper symbolizes the blood of Christ’s sacrifice, sealing the new covenant God has at last made with his people. The new covenant, ratified by Christ’s death, is what the church therefore commemorates each time it celebrates the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\nIn his institution of the Lord’s Supper, Jesus did not elucidate what the “newness” of the covenant entailed. Elsewhere he mentioned a “baptism with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5; 11:16; cf. Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; and Jn 1:33, where this promise is found on the lips of John the Baptist; cf. also 1 Cor 12:13). Yet both OT prophecies refer to the same new covenant that God would establish in the future, as shown in 2 Corinthians 3:6. There the apostle Paul stated that God “has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant” (rsv<\/span>; cf. Jer 31:31), not “in a written code but in the Spirit” (rsv<\/span>; cf. Jl 2:28-32), for “the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life” (rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nSuperiority of the New Covenant<\/p>\nIn 2 Corinthians 3, Paul was showing that in contrast to the old (Mosaic) covenant (v 14), which was a dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone (v 7), the new covenant instituted by Jesus is one of far greater splendor (vv 8-9), written on the human heart by the Spirit of the living God himself (v 3).<\/p>\nThe new covenant concept is treated most exhaustively and systematically in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews 8:8-12 the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the longest OT quotation found in the NT. In Hebrews 12:24 a different Greek word for “new” is used, but the meaning remains the same. The theme of the new covenant dominates the book of Hebrews, which was written to encourage faltering Christians by demonstrating the superiority of the Christian faith over their old Jewish beliefs and practices. In Hebrews the new covenant is seen as better than the old “obsolete” covenant in a number of ways.<\/p>\n1. The new covenant has a better priesthood than the old covenant, since there is no longer any need for a continual change of priests due to death (Heb 7:23). One continual priest now lives forever to make intercession before God on behalf of his people (vv 24-25).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new covenant priest is better than those of the old covenant, since Jesus does not have to offer sacrifices continually for his own sins and then for the sins of his people. He has instead made one complete and perfect offering (7:27; 9:25-28; 10:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new covenant has a better sacrifice than the old covenant; what the blood of bulls and goats could not do, since the atonement they brought could at best be only partial (10:2-3), the blood of Christ has done once for all (9:11-14; 10:1-10).<\/li>\n<li>4. The new covenant is built on “better promises” than the old (8:6).<\/li>\n<li>5. Whereas the old covenant was imperfect (8:7) and thus became obsolete (8:13), the new covenant is perfect and eternal (13:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Whereas the old covenant provided a believer with no direct access to God (9:6-8), the new covenant provides a direct access to God that can purify and perfect the believer’s conscience (cf. 9:14 with 9:9).<\/li>\n<li>7. The new covenant possesses a better “surety,” or guarantee, an oath sworn by God himself (7:20-22).<\/li>\n<li>8. The new covenant assures the presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of each believer. The new covenant community has been touched by the promised Spirit (6:4), who, according to Paul, is both the seal and guarantee of their inheritance (see 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14).<\/li>\nConclusion<\/p>\nThe new covenant and its accompanying new commandment are both fulfillments of what was implicit in the old. The new covenant is written on the heart of each member of the new covenant community by the Holy Spirit. The power of God’s Spirit within, enabling the believer to carry out the new commandment (Rom 8:2-4; Gal 5:16-25), is a distinctive feature of the new covenant.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Covenant.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVENANT, The New<\/h3>\nA gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT.<\/p>\nAlthough the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremiah saw God making with Israel “after those days” (vv 32-34) with the covenant God had made with his people in the days of Moses. The contrast is seen, first of all, in the internal nature of the new covenant. Whereas the old covenant was written on tablets of stone (Ex 31:18; 34:27-32; Dt 4:13; 5:22; 9:11; 10:3-4) and in a book (Ex 24:7; cf. the phrase “old written code,” Rom 7:6, rsv<\/span>), the new covenant is to be written on the human heart. One result is a clearer revelation of what God demands; another is the enablement of believers to fulfill those demands (see Rom 8:2-4). The interior nature of the new covenant is spoken of in several other passages (Ez 11:19-21; 36:26-27) and made explicit in the prophet Joel of a time when God “will pour out [his] spirit on all flesh” (Jl 2:28-32).<\/p>\nA second contrast is in the way God’s people know him under the two covenants. There is no doubt that Israel under the old covenant “knew” God; God had revealed himself, though at times the nation tended to forget this (Jgs 2:10; Hos 4:1, 6). What the prophets envisioned in the new covenant is a unique personal knowledge of God by each individual member of the covenant community.<\/p>\nFinally, the two covenants differ in regard to God’s dealing with human sin. Jeremiah promised that God would forgive the iniquity of his people and blot out their sin. Israel already knew that God delighted in mercy and forgiveness (Ex 34:6-7), but Jeremiah was saying that God would never again remember their sin (Jer 31:34). Under the old covenant there was a reminder of sin year after year (Heb 10:3); under the new covenant no remembrance of sin remains (v 14).<\/p>\nA New Covenant<\/p>\nThe expression “new covenant” is found at least six times in the NT (1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:8, 13; 9:15; 12:24; and probably Lk 22:20, according to some manuscripts). In certain Greek manuscripts the phrase is also found in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, where “new” seems to have been added by various scribes to “blood of the covenant,” in order to make these accounts conform to parallel accounts of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians or possibly in Luke.<\/p>\nEven though the term “new” is not found in the accounts in Matthew and Mark in the best Greek manuscripts, and was therefore probably not part of the original text, it is clear from all four accounts that Jesus saw the Lord’s Supper as instituting a different and therefore “new” covenant. The covenant was being sealed by his sacrificial death, that is, by his blood, just as the Mosaic covenant was sealed by the “blood of the covenant” (Ex 24:6-8). The cup of the Lord’s Supper symbolizes the blood of Christ’s sacrifice, sealing the new covenant God has at last made with his people. The new covenant, ratified by Christ’s death, is what the church therefore commemorates each time it celebrates the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\nIn his institution of the Lord’s Supper, Jesus did not elucidate what the “newness” of the covenant entailed. Elsewhere he mentioned a “baptism with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5; 11:16; cf. Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; and Jn 1:33, where this promise is found on the lips of John the Baptist; cf. also 1 Cor 12:13). Yet both OT prophecies refer to the same new covenant that God would establish in the future, as shown in 2 Corinthians 3:6. There the apostle Paul stated that God “has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant” (rsv<\/span>; cf. Jer 31:31), not “in a written code but in the Spirit” (rsv<\/span>; cf. Jl 2:28-32), for “the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life” (rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nSuperiority of the New Covenant<\/p>\nIn 2 Corinthians 3, Paul was showing that in contrast to the old (Mosaic) covenant (v 14), which was a dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone (v 7), the new covenant instituted by Jesus is one of far greater splendor (vv 8-9), written on the human heart by the Spirit of the living God himself (v 3).<\/p>\nThe new covenant concept is treated most exhaustively and systematically in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews 8:8-12 the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the longest OT quotation found in the NT. In Hebrews 12:24 a different Greek word for “new” is used, but the meaning remains the same. The theme of the new covenant dominates the book of Hebrews, which was written to encourage faltering Christians by demonstrating the superiority of the Christian faith over their old Jewish beliefs and practices. In Hebrews the new covenant is seen as better than the old “obsolete” covenant in a number of ways.<\/p>\n1. The new covenant has a better priesthood than the old covenant, since there is no longer any need for a continual change of priests due to death (Heb 7:23). One continual priest now lives forever to make intercession before God on behalf of his people (vv 24-25).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new covenant priest is better than those of the old covenant, since Jesus does not have to offer sacrifices continually for his own sins and then for the sins of his people. He has instead made one complete and perfect offering (7:27; 9:25-28; 10:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new covenant has a better sacrifice than the old covenant; what the blood of bulls and goats could not do, since the atonement they brought could at best be only partial (10:2-3), the blood of Christ has done once for all (9:11-14; 10:1-10).<\/li>\n<li>4. The new covenant is built on “better promises” than the old (8:6).<\/li>\n<li>5. Whereas the old covenant was imperfect (8:7) and thus became obsolete (8:13), the new covenant is perfect and eternal (13:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Whereas the old covenant provided a believer with no direct access to God (9:6-8), the new covenant provides a direct access to God that can purify and perfect the believer’s conscience (cf. 9:14 with 9:9).<\/li>\n<li>7. The new covenant possesses a better “surety,” or guarantee, an oath sworn by God himself (7:20-22).<\/li>\n<li>8. The new covenant assures the presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of each believer. The new covenant community has been touched by the promised Spirit (6:4), who, according to Paul, is both the seal and guarantee of their inheritance (see 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14).<\/li>\nConclusion<\/p>\nThe new covenant and its accompanying new commandment are both fulfillments of what was implicit in the old. The new covenant is written on the heart of each member of the new covenant community by the Holy Spirit. The power of God’s Spirit within, enabling the believer to carry out the new commandment (Rom 8:2-4; Gal 5:16-25), is a distinctive feature of the new covenant.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Covenant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVENANT, The New A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT. Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremi...","summary_en":"COVENANT, The New A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT. Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremi...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15980,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Letter to the Hebrews","title_en":"Letter to the Hebrews","content_ro":"<h3>HEBREWS, Letter to the<\/h3>\nOne of the most profound and enigmatic books in the NT. The identity of its author, the time of its writing, and the people and place to which it was sent are all shrouded in mystery. Yet, in spite of the uncertainty, Hebrews remains one of the most timely and relevant books in the Bible. Some 300 years ago John Owen, the English Puritan, appropriately remarked: “No doubt the Epistle next in importance to Romans is this to the Hebrews.” The letter is both doctrinal and practical, theological and pastoral. In short, it builds a compelling case for the superiority of Christianity. Hebrews also reflects the impassioned concern of a pastor’s heart. Those who have experienced God’s ultimate work of grace in Christ are urged to hold fast to God’s final word of revelation in his Son.<\/p>\nUnlike most other NT epistles, Hebrews does not begin like a letter. There is no introductory salutation, the writer is not identified, and no mention is made of those to whom the document is addressed. The author characterizes the work as a “word of exhortation” (13:22, rsv<\/span>), which suggests a sermon or oral homily (cf. Acts 13:15). Nonetheless, its conclusion is that of a conventional letter (Heb 13:22-25). Some have detected a gradual transition in the document from an essay to a more specifically epistolary form (cf. 2:1; 4:1; 13:22-25). The evidence thus suggests that the author may have cast the original homiletic “word of exhortation” into letter form when the need to communicate in writing with his Christian friends became urgent.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Origin and Destination<\/p>\n• Purpose<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nWho wrote the book is not directly stated in the letter. Since the late second century, various authorities have linked the document with the apostle Paul. Clement of Alexandria (d. 220) theorized that Paul wrote the letter in Hebrew for Jews and that Luke translated it into Greek. However, this suggestion has not been widely received by modern scholars. Clement’s pupil Origen (d. 254) stated more generally that the thoughts of the letter are Pauline but that the style is unlike that of the known writings of the apostle. Other early authorities, such as Jerome (d. 419) and Augustine (d. 430), persuaded that canonicity demanded apostolic authorship, likewise affirmed that Paul was the author.<\/p>\nYet a number of factors argue against the Pauline authorship of Hebrews. The anonymity of the letter is contrary to the consistent pattern of Paul’s introduction in the opening salutation of his letters. Moreover, Hebrews 2:3 indicates the writer was discipled by eyewitnesses of the Lord. Yet Paul insists that his knowledge of Christ was gained from a firsthand encounter with the risen Christ (cf. Gal 1:12). F. F. Bruce evaluates the authorship of Hebrews as follows: “We may say with certainty that the thought of the epistle is not Paul’s, the language is not Paul’s, and the technique of OT quotations is not Paul’s.”<\/p>\nEarly Christian tradition suggests that Barnabas may have written Hebrews. According to Tertullian (d. 220), many early authorities believed that Barnabas was responsible for the letter. Acts 4:36 (asv<\/span>) speaks of him as a “son of exhortation” (cf. Heb 13:22). Furthermore, as a Levite, Barnabas would have been familiar with the Jewish sacrificial ritual so prominent in the letter.<\/p>\nLuther was the first to suggest that Hebrews may have been penned by Apollos, “an excellent man of learning, who had been a disciple of the apostles and learned much from them, and who was very well versed in Scripture.” As a native of Alexandria (Acts 18:24), Apollos would have been familiar with the typological interpretation evident in Hebrews. Clearly Apollos was the sort of man who was qualified to write Hebrews.<\/p>\nOther names have been suggested as possible authors. Calvin surmised that either Luke or Clement of Rome was responsible for the letter. It is noted that the Greek of Hebrews resembles the language and style of the third Gospel and Acts. Others theorize that Hebrews may have been written by Silas, a Jewish Christian from Jerusalem who would have been thoroughly familiar with the Levitical ritual. Silas is described as one of “the church leaders” (Acts 15:22). He was a coworker with Paul in the gentile mission, and apparently was known in Rome as well as in Jerusalem (1 Pt 5:12-13).<\/p>\nIn conclusion, it is probable that the author of Hebrews was a second-generation Jewish Christian, a master of classical Greek whose Bible was the Septuagint, conversant with first-century Alexandrian philosophy, and a creative apologist for the Christian faith. As to the identity of that author, we can affirm no more than Origen in the third century: “But as to who actually wrote the Letter, God alone knows.”<\/p>\n\nBackground<\/p>\nThe very early title of the letter, “To Hebrews,” suggests that the book concerns Jewish Christians living in the Dispersion. The letter itself offers a few hints of the historical circumstances surrounding its composition. Not long after becoming Christians, the readers of the letter were exposed to severe persecution (Heb 10:32-36). During their trial, the new believers endured imprisonment, confiscation of personal property, and public ridicule. Yet the persecution had not been fatal; they had not yet been called upon to lay down their lives in martyrdom (12:4). Amid the excitement of their newfound faith in Christ, they had demonstrated practical concern and love by ministering to fellow believers in need (6:10) and comforting others who had been harassed for their faith (10:34).<\/p>\nBut since the time of those earlier trials, the readers had made little progress in Christian maturity (5:11-13). Moreover, in the face of a new wave of persecution, and despondent over an apparent delay in the Lord’s coming, the believers had begun to waver and abandon hope. Indeed, they threatened to renounce Jesus Christ and to revert back to the security of the Jewish religion that enjoyed the protection of Roman law.<\/p>\nThus we read that because of the strange, new teachings of certain Judaizers who sought to draw them back to their former religion (13:9), the wavering believers had neglected to assemble together (10:25) and had lost confidence in their spiritual leaders (13:17). Faced with the possibility that these Jewish Christians might abandon their faith altogether, the writer sternly warns them of the tragic consequences of renouncing the Son (6:4-6; 10:26-31; 13:12-19) and urges them to renew their commitment to Christ, God’s foremost and final revelation.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nLacking firm information as to the author and recipients of the letter, no certainty exists as to the date of the writing. We have noted that the author of Hebrews, and probably his readers as well, had been discipled by those who were personally acquainted with Jesus (2:3). Further evidence in the letter suggests that Paul probably was not alive. Timothy, Paul’s younger associate, was still living (13:23).<\/p>\nThe absence of any mention in Hebrews of the destruction of the Jerusalem temple is significant for dating the letter. In terms of his argument that the old covenant had passed away and the legal priesthood had been superseded, the writer would scarcely have omitted mention of the temple’s destruction had he written the letter later than AD<\/span> 70. Hebrews 9:6-10 and 10:1-4, 11-14 plainly suggest that the Jewish sacrifices were still being offered. Hence, it may be supposed with some degree of certainty that the letter was written prior to AD<\/span> 70. If it was written after Paul’s death, that would put it after AD<\/span> 67, the traditional date of his execution. Thus, Hebrews may have been written in the period AD<\/span> 67–70.<\/p>\nOrigin and Destination<\/p>\nThe place from which Hebrews was written is also uncertain. Some manuscripts of the letter bear the subscription “written from Rome” or “written from Italy.” Such notations are educated deductions drawn from the statement “The Christians from Italy send you their greetings” (13:24). Most probably this indicates that the writer is extending greetings to a church in Italy on behalf of Italian Christians associated with him in another land, possibly Asia. Nevertheless, we cannot locate the point of origin with any certainty.<\/p>\nIt has been suggested that the letter was written to a group of Jewish converts to Christianity. Yet the precise community to which it was sent is a matter of debate. Opinions vary from Judea to Spain. Tradition has it that Hebrews was directed to Jewish Christians living in Palestine. But against a Palestinian destination it may be argued: (1) the readers had had no personal contact with Jesus (2:3), an unlikely event for mid-first-century residents of Palestine; (2) the statement in 12:4 that his readers had not yet given their lives could hardly be said of Palestinian Christians of the period; (3) the generosity of the believers (10:34; 13:16) was inconsistent with the poverty of the Jerusalem church; and (4) the general tone of the letter is Hellenistic rather than rabbinical.<\/p>\nOther proposals for the destination of Hebrews include (1) Caesarea, on the supposition of Lukan authorship; (2) Syrian Antioch or Cyprus, assuming Barnabas wrote the letter; (3) Ephesus, in the light of the conversion of many Jews during Paul’s ministry in that city; (4) Colosse, noting certain similarities between the Colossian heresy and the false beliefs of the “Hebrews”; and (5) Alexandria, because of the apparent influence of the philosopher Philo Judaeus in the letter.<\/p>\nThe thesis that Hebrews was directed to a group of Jewish Christians in Rome has found favor with a number of scholars. Arguments in support of a Roman destination include the following facts: (1) The letter was first known in Rome no later than AD<\/span> 96. (2) Romans 11:13, 18 suggests that the church at Rome consisted of a Jewish-Christian minority. (3) References to persecution and suffering endured by the readers (Heb 10:32-33; 12:4) are consistent with known repressive measures exacted by the Roman authorities. (4) There is a good possibility that saints who “come from Italy” would convey greetings to their brethren in Rome. (5) The Jewish community in Rome preserved certain features of nonconformist or sectarian Judaism that would explain several notable similarities between the theology and praxis of the Qumran community and that expressed in Hebrews.<\/p>\nIt is likely that the letter was addressed to a small subgroup within a local church. The exhortation in 5:12 (rsv<\/span>)—“by this time you ought to be teachers”—hardly would have been relevant to an entire congregation. Hebrews 13:7, 24 lends further support to the theory that the letter was sent to a small group, perhaps to a “house church” within a larger assembly.<\/p>\nTentatively, one might conclude that the addressees were converts from Judaism who dwelt in the Dispersion. Hence they were familiar with OT Judaism and were acquainted with the religious philosophy of the Greek world. Possibly the readers comprised a house fellowship that tended to disassociate itself from the parent group (10:25). The existence of such house churches in Rome is confirmed by Romans 16:5, 14-15.<\/p>\nPurpose<\/p>\nIn response to the threat that his Jewish-Christian friends might renounce Christianity and revert to Judaism, the writer by a “word of exhortation” (13:22) communicated to them the finality of the Christian revelation. He sought also to inform his despondent, vacillating readers that Christ, the object of God’s final revelation, is vastly superior to the greatest of Judaism’s heroes. The author, in addition, affirmed the heavenly and eternal character of the salvation secured by Christ. Whereas the legal sacrificial system was powerless to effect the remission of sin, Christ the eternal High Priest “is able, once and forever, to save everyone who comes to God through him” (7:25, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nIn short, the writer commended to his readers the need for patient endurance amid the persecution and sufferings to which the heirs of eternal salvation are inevitably exposed. Just as Jesus, the forerunner of our faith, suffered and patiently endured in anticipation of eternal reward, so ought harassed, oppressed believers “take a new grip with your tired hands and stand firm on your shaky legs” (12:12, nlt<\/span>) in anticipation of their reception in that eternal “kingdom that cannot be destroyed” (12:28, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe author’s final purpose for writing was to proclaim the fearful judgment that awaits those who repudiate Jesus Christ. Since “our God is a consuming fire” (12:29, nlt<\/span>), “what makes us think that we can escape if we are indifferent to this great salvation” (2:3, nlt<\/span>)?<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nNext to Romans, Hebrews is the most doctrinal book in the NT. The writer develops a series of weighty arguments to demonstrate the superiority of the gospel of Christ to the religion of Judaism. Since Jesus is final both as to his person and his work, Christianity is the ultimate and normative faith. The book’s particularism runs counter to the spirit of the modern world.<\/p>\n<h5>The Superiority of the Son to Former Revelation (1:1-4)<\/h5>\nThe writer acknowledges that God revealed himself to the prophets of old in many ways—through dreams, visions, audible speech, and mighty acts. But “in these last days” (the advent of the end times, cf. 9:26) God spoke finally and definitively through his own Son (1:2). Central to the argument is the fact that in one way or another the prophets received an eternal word from God. Yet given the intimate relation of the Son to the Father, God’s latest revelation has come forth from the very depths of his own being.<\/p>\nIdentification of the Son as the pinnacle of divine revelation leads to a concise but profound statement of Christ’s person and his cosmic work. The Son reflects the glory of God in that the sum of the divine attributes brilliantly shine through his person. Moreover, he bears the very image and stamp of God’s nature (1:3), as the wax bears the impress of the seal. Jesus as God’s final word of revelation is truly the divine and eternal Son of God. Christ’s excellence is further displayed in the fact that he is the mighty agent through whom the universe was created (v 2) and by whom the cosmic order is sustained (v 3). In the moral realm he has wrought the purification of sins and now sits enthroned on God’s right hand (cf. 8:1). God’s pleasure toward the Son is seen in that he has appointed Christ heir and head of all (1:2). His name is surpassed by none save God the Father (v 4).<\/p>\n<h5>The Superiority of the Son to Angels (1:5–2:18)<\/h5>\nAngels enjoyed an exalted status in biblical and postbiblical Judaism. Traditionally the Jews believed that angels praised God upon his throne, mediated God’s revelation to men, attended to God’s will, and gave succor to the people of God. Angels were far superior to men in power and knowledge. According to the Jewish Apocrypha, angels ruled the stars and were responsible for the rise and fall of civilizations. In Qumran thought, angelic beings would engage in a final cosmic struggle with Belial and the forces of evil at the end of the age.<\/p>\nAgainst this background the writer of Hebrews argues that the Son is vastly superior to the angels. To prove his point, the author assembles a string of well-known OT texts and applies them directly to the Son. God never said of any angel, “Today I have become your Father” (Ps 2:7, nlt<\/span>). Yet just such a claim was made on behalf of the Son (Heb 1:5). When the Son incarnated himself in the world, he received the obedient worship of angels (v 6). His is the sovereignty and the eternality and the majesty at God’s right hand (vv 8, 11-12). By contrast, angels are “only servants” (v 14) that rank below the Son in dignity and might.<\/p>\nIn Hebrews 2:1-4 the writer parenthetically warns his wavering congregation of the danger of drifting away from the truth of God. If disobedience to the law mediated by angels resulted in stern punishment, how much more severe would be God’s judgment on those who trampled under foot the revelation delivered by the Son? If God’s saving grace in Christ is neglected, retribution will surely follow (2:3).<\/p>\nThe mention of angels turns the writer’s mind to Jesus’ humiliation and exaltation (2:5-18). Psalm 8, a song about the smallness and yet the significance of man, is applied to the experience of Jesus. In assuming human flesh and blood, Jesus was made “for a little while . . . lower than the angels” (Heb 2:7, nlt<\/span>). But subsequent to the completion of his earthly work, he was elevated above the angels and crowned with the glory and honor of heaven (v 9). The theological implications of Christ’s descent and ascent are carefully spelled out: Christ descended to earth (1) to bring many children to glory (v 10), (2) to destroy the devil (v 14), (3) to deliver his people from the bondage of death (v 15), and (4) to make an offering on the cross for the sins of the people (v 17). He ascended to heaven (1) to intercede on our behalf as a faithful High Priest (v 17), and (2) to succor those who are sorely tempted (v 18). The perfect summary of Christ’s person and work is given in Hebrews 2:9: “What we do see is Jesus, who ‘for a little while was made lower than the angels’ and now is ‘crowned with glory and honor’ because he suffered death for us. Yes, by God’s grace, Jesus tasted death for everyone in all the world” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>The Superiority of the Son to Moses and Joshua (3:1–4:13)<\/h5>\nJewish Christians contemplating reversion to Judaism surely believed that Moses was one of the greatest figures in Israel’s history. So esteemed was the one who led Israel out of Egypt through the wilderness and who gave them the Law that there was no one in Israel’s history so honored as Moses. Yet the author of Hebrews argues that Moses, though faithful to his calling, was but a servant in the house of God. Jesus, by contrast, was not a servant but a Son; he was not a mere dweller in the house but the very builder of the structure. Jesus, therefore, far transcends the revered figure of Moses.<\/p>\nPractical implications are drawn from Jesus’ superiority to Moses. From Psalm 95:7-11 the writer rehearses the tragic experience of Israel under Moses during the desert wanderings (Heb 3:7-19). Throughout the 40-year wilderness experience the people hardened their hearts and rebelled against God. In turn God was provoked by their stubbornness and swore that those who sinned would never enter the rest he was going to provide (vv 10-11, 18). The writer thus argues that if disobedience to God under Moses had serious consequences, forsaking Christ will be much more perilous. Hence the wavering Christians are urged to watch lest due to an evil, unbelieving heart they should fall away from the living God (v 12). Nothing short of steadfast persistence will lead to the attainment of the heavenly goal (v 14).<\/p>\nJoshua, likewise, was regarded as a great leader of Israel. Yet because of disobedience, the people under Joshua’s leadership failed to enter the rest that God had planned. That rest spoken of corresponds to the Sabbath rest of God (4:3-4), and is a concept closely related to salvation. It is a spiritual reality that is achieved by turning from our own empty works and trusting in the finished work of Christ (v 10). The author reminds the readers that “there is a special rest [a Sabbath rest] still waiting for the people of God” (v 9, nlt<\/span>), one that only Christ can provide. Christians not only benefit from this Sabbath rest in the present age but anticipate its full realization in the age to come. One of the chief means of ensuring entry into the Sabbath rest of salvation is the Word of God (v 12). The living and powerful Word penetrates the innermost depths of the soul, reveals our impoverished condition, and strengthens the trusting heart.<\/p>\n<h5>The Superiority of the Priesthood of the Son (4:14–7:28)<\/h5>\nAlmost half of Hebrews is devoted to the priesthood of Jesus Christ. The writer goes to great lengths to demonstrate that the revered Aaronic priestly system has been superseded by the High Priest “in the line of Melchizedek” (5:6; 6:20; 7:11). This central theme had been anticipated earlier when Christ was referred to as “our merciful and faithful High Priest before God” who has made atonement for sins (2:17, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nHebrews makes the claim that Jesus’ priesthood is the ultimate ground of the believers’ confidence (4:14-16). On three counts Jesus surpasses the old legal priestly order. First, he is an exalted<\/em> high priest (v 14). The Jewish high priest climbed the mount to enter the temple sanctuary. But Jesus, our great high priest, has ascended to heaven itself and entered the sanctuary on high. He ministers in no earthly tabernacle but in the very presence of God. Second, Jesus is an empathetic<\/em> high priest (v 15a). Fully God and fully man, Jesus suffers along with his people in their trials and afflictions. From heaven’s perspective he knows fully what his people are called upon to endure. He “feels” our hurts, and he does so perfectly. Finally, Jesus is a sinless<\/em> high priest (v 15b). Day in and day out (7:27), year in and year out, the Levitical priests were required to bring sacrifices for their own sins. Yet Jesus had no sin that needed cleansing, for “he is holy and blameless, unstained by sin” (v 26, nlt<\/span>). In view of Jesus’ priestly perfections, sorely tempted Christians are urged to come to the throne of grace to receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need (4:16).<\/p>\nFor those not convinced that Jesus was indeed a legitimate priest, two prerequisites for priesthood are detailed. First, if the high priest is to represent humanity before God, he must be taken from among men (5:1-2). And second, he must be called by God to high priestly office, as was Aaron (v 4). Christ has fully satisfied these qualifications. From Psalms 2:7 and 110:4 it is shown that Jesus did not take this office upon himself but was appointed by God (Heb 5:5-6). Moreover, from the obedience that he had to learn (v 8) and from the agony of the Gethsemane experience (v 7) it is clear that Jesus was in every way a man. Nevertheless, Hebrews makes it perfectly clear that Jesus was not a priest after the order of Aaron but a high priest in the line of Melchizedek (v 10).<\/p>\nAfter introducing the theme of Christ as a Melchizedekian high priest, the writer recalls that his readers were not ready for such advanced teaching. Although not new converts (5:12), his friends had remained spiritually immature and sluggish. Hence the writer issues the challenge to press on to Christian maturity, to be ready for the solid food of advanced teaching.<\/p>\nIn his digression the writer warns not only against spiritual immaturity but also against “apostasy.” The question now arises whether the author’s apostasy teaching in Hebrews 6:4-8 and 10:26-31 contradicts the NT doctrine of the perseverance of the saints. Undoubtedly it does not. Some authorities hold that those addressed were not true Christians, hence the issue is not one of apostasy. It is possible, like Judas Iscariot or Simon Magus (Acts 8:9-24), to possess considerable knowledge of the gospel and fall short of personal commitment. But the writer makes it quite clear that in the case of his addressees he is persuaded otherwise (Heb 6:9). The most reasonable view is that in these two hortatory passages the writer advances a hypothetical argument warning his friends of the utter seriousness of reverting back to Judaism. That is, if a falling away were to occur, renewal would be impossible unless Christ were to die a second time. The writer sums up the point of these difficult passages with the words “It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (10:31, nlt<\/span>). Nevertheless, followers of Christ may confidently lay hold of God’s promises, confirmed by solemn oath, to see them through their trials (6:13-18). God may be trusted to hold the believer fast.<\/p>\nHebrews 7 contains an intricate argument for the superiority of Christ’s priesthood over the old legal order. Melchizedek, the ancient priest-king of Salem (Gn 14:18-20), is regarded as a primordial type of Christ. He is “king of righteousness” and “king of peace” (Heb 7:2). The solemn priest from Salem has figuratively what Christ possesses actually: neither mother nor father, neither beginning nor end of life (v 3). Melchizedek is shown to be superior to Abraham on three counts: (1) Melchizedek blessed the patriarch (vv 1, 7); (2) he accepted tithes from Abraham (vv 2-6); and (3) Melchizedek lives on since the OT nowhere mentions his death (v 8). It follows that since Levi was in the loins of Abraham as seed (v 10), Melchizedek is superior to the Levitical priests. And inasmuch as Christ is a priest in the likeness of Melchizedek (v 15), it follows that the Son of God is more excellent than the old legal priesthood.<\/p>\nThe result is that the old Levitical priesthood has been superseded by the priesthood of Christ. The demise of the old order was inevitable, for its repetitive animal sacrifices could never effect spiritual perfection (7:11). It was a system characterized by weakness and uselessness (v 18). By contrast, Christ’s priesthood is indestructible, eternal, uninterrupted, efficacious, final, and perfect (vv 16, 21, 24-27). Forgiveness and reconciliation is possible only through Christ, our great High Priest.<\/p>\n<h5>The Superiority of the Priestly Work of the Son (8:1–10:39)<\/h5>\nSince Christ’s priestly office far excels the old order, it follows that his priestly ministration is superior to all that has gone before. The theme of Christ as high priest in a better sanctuary is introduced (8:1-5). The writer utilizes Plato’s distinction between the ideal form in heaven and the imperfect copy on earth to argue that the Levitical sanctuary and sacrifices are mere shadows of the heavenly realities: (1) Christ ministers in the true tent that is the heavenly sanctuary (vv 2, 5); (2) he discharges his high priestly service in the very presence of the Father, which results in a far more effective ministry (vv 1, 6); and (3) his oblation on the cross was the ultimate sacrifice (v 3). How unreasonable it is that his Christian readers should go back to the old Jewish priestly system!<\/p>\nChrist is the minister of a new and better covenant (8:6-13). The old covenant established by God with the nation’s fathers was not to be despised; nevertheless, it had become ineffectual and obsolete (v 13). Indeed, the prophet Jeremiah (Jer 31:31-34) foresaw the new covenant that God would inaugurate with his people. This new covenant sealed by Christ involves (1) the immediate work of the Holy Spirit on the mind and heart (Heb 8:10); (2) a personal and intimate knowledge of God (v 11); and (3) the full absolution of sins (v 12). This new and better covenant has been established on the work of Christ, the great High Priest.<\/p>\nChapter 9 gives a detailed comparison of the efficacy of priestly service under the old and new covenants. The Levitical priests ministered in a material sanctuary on earth (vv 1-5). Features of the tabernacle and its furnishings are described to highlight their obsolescence. More important, however, is the character of the sacrificial ritual conducted in the earthly sanctuary. The Jewish priests in their daily service were not permitted to enter the Holy of Holies, which contained the ark of the covenant and the mercy seat—the place of propitiation of sins (v 6). The high priest alone could enter the Holy of Holies, and then but once a year on the Day of Atonement, and only after sacrificing for his own sins (v 7). The inaccessibility of the Holy of Holies signified that access to the presence of God had not been opened. The presence of the curtain symbolized that the people had no way to the throne of God, the priests had no way, and the high priest had a limited way and only once a year. Moreover, the sacrifices brought by the Jewish priests could not purify the conscience but merely dealt with external ritual cleansing (vv 9-10). A truly effectual sacrifice must await “the time of reformation” (v 10).<\/p>\nChrist’s priestly ministration is shown to be far more efficacious. First, the Christian’s High Priest has brought a better sacrifice (9:11-14), and here we arrive at the heart of the message of Hebrews. Employing the imagery of the tabernacle, the author demonstrates that Christ our High Priest has accomplished what the Jewish priests failed to do. He entered the heavenly Holy of Holies, not repeatedly, but once<\/em> for all, thereby effecting a completed redemption (v 12). Christ brought to the altar, not the blood of bulls and goats, but his own life’s blood. The Lord did not merely lay down a material body, but he presented himself to God through the eternal Spirit (v 14). Christ’s better sacrifice thus goes beyond cleansing of the flesh to the purification of the defiled conscience.<\/p>\nSecond, Christ through his death has instituted a better covenant (9:15-23). The teaching of Hebrews 8:6-13 is developed further. The old covenant was sealed with the blood of calves and goats (9:19). But the new covenant was ratified with the blood of Christ, God’s own Son. The new covenant thus could accomplish what the old covenant merely foreshadowed—forgiveness and cleansing of sins (v 22).<\/p>\nThird, Christ ministers in a better tabernacle (9:24-28). Our Lord entered, not into a merely earthly sanctuary, but into the holy place of heaven, there to represent us (v 24). Access to the throne is not limited to one day per year, for he is continually in the presence of the Father. Nor is it necessary that repeated sacrifices be made. Christ’s single sacrifice on the cross has conquered sin once and for all (v 26). In sum, as regards the sanctuary, the covenant, and the sacrifices, the Christian’s High Priest is vastly superior to the old Jewish order.<\/p>\nIn order to drive home these crucial points, the writer in chapter 10 expands on the theme of the absolute finality of Christ’s high priestly work. The earlier argument concerning the futile character of the Levitical sacrifices (9:6-14) is repeated for emphasis (10:1-4). The Mosaic ceremonial legislation called for repetitive sacrifices, which could never perfect the worshiper (v 1). Instead of purifying one’s life, they served only as a yearly reminder of sin (v 3) until Christ should come.<\/p>\nThe writer discovers in Psalm 40:6-8 a prediction that the eternal Christ would become man for the purpose of offering himself as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Heb 10:5-10). Once again the sanctifying power of Christ’s single self-oblation is emphasized (v 10). The vivid contrast is again drawn between the ineffective ministry of the Jewish priests who stand during the daily ritual (v 11), and the effectual single sacrifice of Christ, who is now seated at the right hand of God (v 12). Since Jesus “by that one offering . . . perfected forever all those whom he is making holy” (v 14, nlt<\/span>), nothing can be added to what the seated Sovereign has accomplished (v 18).<\/p>\nIn view of the manifest superiority of Christ’s priestly office and work, the struggling Christians are exhorted to appropriate the means of grace at their disposal (10:19-39). In the midst of trials and persecution they should remember that Christ has effectively opened the way to God (vv 19-20). They are summoned to come to God in faith with hearts cleansed by Christ’s sacrifice (v 22). Those tempted to revert to legal religion should hold fast and support one another in love (vv 23-24). The means of grace afforded by corporate worship should not be neglected (v 25). In short, the wavering Jewish Christians are summoned to renewed endurance and fidelity to their Lord (vv 26-31). What God has promised to his people he will surely make good.<\/p>\n<h5>The Superiority of the Life of Faith (11:1–12:29)<\/h5>\nThe discussion of faith and endurance as the solution to despondency (10:36-38) prompts a fuller consideration of the faith theme. Faith is a prominent concept in the book of Hebrews, as attested by the fact that the word occurs some 35 times in the letter. The Pauline idea of faith as the means of legal justification is adapted to the particular circumstances of the threatened Jewish Christians. The concept of faith is broader in this book than the strictly saving faith discussed by Paul, in that it leads to spiritual salvation (11:39-40). Faith is the power by which heaven’s unseen realities are laid hold of to satisfy the soul. Faith enables the Christian disciple to view the world and interpret the flow of history from the divine perspective. Faith is the means of victory over the world of sin and woe. Through faith the believer approaches the throne of grace (4:16) with the confidence and assurance that God will enable him to overcome.<\/p>\nThe victory faith affords is amply illustrated from the history of God’s OT people. Abel, Enoch, and Noah in the primal history; Abraham, the father of faith; Moses, the leader of the young nation; and many valiant prophets and martyrs serve as living memorials to faith’s overcoming power. And yet God has something better in store for his sanctified people, the church (11:40): the reality of the living Christ.<\/p>\nYet the greatest model of steadfast endurance in suffering is Jesus, “the Originator and Perfecter of our faith” (12:2, nlt<\/span> mg). When surrounded with trials, the Christian needs to recall Christ, who in anticipation of the heavenly crown endured the cross and its shame. The Christian’s trials are trivial compared with what Jesus Christ was called upon to suffer (v 3). Moreover, for the people of God, suffering and persecution prove to be disguised blessings. The rod of discipline confirms our status as children of the living God (vv 5-10). But beyond this, the sovereign God is able to transform the Christian’s suffering into inestimable blessing (v 11). Hence the wavering saints should strive for spiritual wholeness and maturity, taking care lest they be overtaken by bitterness and resentment (v 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Final Exhortations and Benediction (13:1-25)<\/h5>\nThe writer in his closing words challenges his Christian friends to be faithful to the tasks that lie at hand. They are to show continued love to the brethren, to extend hospitality to strangers, to uphold the sanctity of marriage, to be content with what they now possess, and to be obedient to their spiritual leaders (13:1-7).<\/p>\nThe readers are warned against the trickery of the Judaizers, who would lead them astray from Jesus Christ, the one who remains “the same yesterday, today, and forever” (13:8). Spiritual determination is strengthened by recalling the example of Christ, who “suffered outside the city gates” for their salvation (v 12). As the people of God, they are challenged to follow Christ “outside the camp,” bearing abuse for him (v 13). Patient endurance is possible when the Christian realizes that he has no enduring city here (v 14). His goal is the heavenly Jerusalem, the eternal city of God.<\/p>\nThe anonymous letter to the unknown “Hebrews” closes with a glorious benediction. The Christian’s God is described as the great “God of peace” (13:20), and Jesus is “the great Shepherd of the sheep,” who established a new and eternal covenant and then rose triumphant from the dead. And the promise is made to the trusting soul that the triune God would “equip you with all you need for doing his will” (v 21, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe letter to the Hebrews is rich in doctrinal teaching. It discloses more about the historical Jesus than any other NT letter. It alone explains the atoning work of Christ under the rubric of the Melchizedekian priest. The letter’s discussion of repentance, justification, sanctification, and perseverance makes it a mine of salvation teaching. Its explication of old and new covenants, impending judgment, and the world to come make a significant contribution to Christian theology. And the letter’s teaching on faith, endurance, and the practical Christian combine to make Hebrews one of the most important documents God has given to the church.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEBREWS, Letter to the<\/h3>\nOne of the most profound and enigmatic books in the NT. The identity of its author, the time of its writing, and the people and place to which it was sent are all shrouded in mystery. Yet, in spite of the uncertainty, Hebrews remains one of the most timely and relevant books in the Bible. Some 300 years ago John Owen, the English Puritan, appropriately remarked: “No doubt the Epistle next in importance to Romans is this to the Hebrews.” The letter is both doctrinal and practical, theological and pastoral. In short, it builds a compelling case for the superiority of Christianity. Hebrews also reflects the impassioned concern of a pastor’s heart. Those who have experienced God’s ultimate work of grace in Christ are urged to hold fast to God’s final word of revelation in his Son.<\/p>\nUnlike most other NT epistles, Hebrews does not begin like a letter. There is no introductory salutation, the writer is not identified, and no mention is made of those to whom the document is addressed. The author characterizes the work as a “word of exhortation” (13:22, rsv<\/span>), which suggests a sermon or oral homily (cf. Acts 13:15). Nonetheless, its conclusion is that of a conventional letter (Heb 13:22-25). Some have detected a gradual transition in the document from an essay to a more specifically epistolary form (cf. 2:1; 4:1; 13:22-25). The evidence thus suggests that the author may have cast the original homiletic “word of exhortation” into letter form when the need to communicate in writing with his Christian friends became urgent.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Origin and Destination<\/p>\n• Purpose<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nWho wrote the book is not directly stated in the letter. Since the late second century, various authorities have linked the document with the apostle Paul. Clement of Alexandria (d. 220) theorized that Paul wrote the letter in Hebrew for Jews and that Luke translated it into Greek. However, this suggestion has not been widely received by modern scholars. Clement’s pupil Origen (d. 254) stated more generally that the thoughts of the letter are Pauline but that the style is unlike that of the known writings of the apostle. Other early authorities, such as Jerome (d. 419) and Augustine (d. 430), persuaded that canonicity demanded apostolic authorship, likewise affirmed that Paul was the author.<\/p>\nYet a number of factors argue against the Pauline authorship of Hebrews. The anonymity of the letter is contrary to the consistent pattern of Paul’s introduction in the opening salutation of his letters. Moreover, Hebrews 2:3 indicates the writer was discipled by eyewitnesses of the Lord. Yet Paul insists that his knowledge of Christ was gained from a firsthand encounter with the risen Christ (cf. Gal 1:12). F. F. Bruce evaluates the authorship of Hebrews as follows: “We may say with certainty that the thought of the epistle is not Paul’s, the language is not Paul’s, and the technique of OT quotations is not Paul’s.”<\/p>\nEarly Christian tradition suggests that Barnabas may have written Hebrews. According to Tertullian (d. 220), many early authorities believed that Barnabas was responsible for the letter. Acts 4:36 (asv<\/span>) speaks of him as a “son of exhortation” (cf. Heb 13:22). Furthermore, as a Levite, Barnabas would have been familiar with the Jewish sacrificial ritual so prominent in the letter.<\/p>\nLuther was the first to suggest that Hebrews may have been penned by Apollos, “an excellent man of learning, who had been a disciple of the apostles and learned much from them, and who was very well versed in Scripture.” As a native of Alexandria (Acts 18:24), Apollos would have been familiar with the typological interpretation evident in Hebrews. Clearly Apollos was the sort of man who was qualified to write Hebrews.<\/p>\nOther names have been suggested as possible authors. Calvin surmised that either Luke or Clement of Rome was responsible for the letter. It is noted that the Greek of Hebrews resembles the language and style of the third Gospel and Acts. Others theorize that Hebrews may have been written by Silas, a Jewish Christian from Jerusalem who would have been thoroughly familiar with the Levitical ritual. Silas is described as one of “the church leaders” (Acts 15:22). He was a coworker with Paul in the gentile mission, and apparently was known in Rome as well as in Jerusalem (1 Pt 5:12-13).<\/p>\nIn conclusion, it is probable that the author of Hebrews was a second-generation Jewish Christian, a master of classical Greek whose Bible was the Septuagint, conversant with first-century Alexandrian philosophy, and a creative apologist for the Christian faith. As to the identity of that author, we can affirm no more than Origen in the third century: “But as to who actually wrote the Letter, God alone knows.”<\/p>\n\nBackground<\/p>\nThe very early title of the letter, “To Hebrews,” suggests that the book concerns Jewish Christians living in the Dispersion. The letter itself offers a few hints of the historical circumstances surrounding its composition. Not long after becoming Christians, the readers of the letter were exposed to severe persecution (Heb 10:32-36). During their trial, the new believers endured imprisonment, confiscation of personal property, and public ridicule. Yet the persecution had not been fatal; they had not yet been called upon to lay down their lives in martyrdom (12:4). Amid the excitement of their newfound faith in Christ, they had demonstrated practical concern and love by ministering to fellow believers in need (6:10) and comforting others who had been harassed for their faith (10:34).<\/p>\nBut since the time of those earlier trials, the readers had made little progress in Christian maturity (5:11-13). Moreover, in the face of a new wave of persecution, and despondent over an apparent delay in the Lord’s coming, the believers had begun to waver and abandon hope. Indeed, they threatened to renounce Jesus Christ and to revert back to the security of the Jewish religion that enjoyed the protection of Roman law.<\/p>\nThus we read that because of the strange, new teachings of certain Judaizers who sought to draw them back to their former religion (13:9), the wavering believers had neglected to assemble together (10:25) and had lost confidence in their spiritual leaders (13:17). Faced with the possibility that these Jewish Christians might abandon their faith altogether, the writer sternly warns them of the tragic consequences of renouncing the Son (6:4-6; 10:26-31; 13:12-19) and urges them to renew their commitment to Christ, God’s foremost and final revelation.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nLacking firm information as to the author and recipients of the letter, no certainty exists as to the date of the writing. We have noted that the author of Hebrews, and probably his readers as well, had been discipled by those who were personally acquainted with Jesus (2:3). Further evidence in the letter suggests that Paul probably was not alive. Timothy, Paul’s younger associate, was still living (13:23).<\/p>\nThe absence of any mention in Hebrews of the destruction of the Jerusalem temple is significant for dating the letter. In terms of his argument that the old covenant had passed away and the legal priesthood had been superseded, the writer would scarcely have omitted mention of the temple’s destruction had he written the letter later than AD<\/span> 70. Hebrews 9:6-10 and 10:1-4, 11-14 plainly suggest that the Jewish sacrifices were still being offered. Hence, it may be supposed with some degree of certainty that the letter was written prior to AD<\/span> 70. If it was written after Paul’s death, that would put it after AD<\/span> 67, the traditional date of his execution. Thus, Hebrews may have been written in the period AD<\/span> 67–70.<\/p>\nOrigin and Destination<\/p>\nThe place from which Hebrews was written is also uncertain. Some manuscripts of the letter bear the subscription “written from Rome” or “written from Italy.” Such notations are educated deductions drawn from the statement “The Christians from Italy send you their greetings” (13:24). Most probably this indicates that the writer is extending greetings to a church in Italy on behalf of Italian Christians associated with him in another land, possibly Asia. Nevertheless, we cannot locate the point of origin with any certainty.<\/p>\nIt has been suggested that the letter was written to a group of Jewish converts to Christianity. Yet the precise community to which it was sent is a matter of debate. Opinions vary from Judea to Spain. Tradition has it that Hebrews was directed to Jewish Christians living in Palestine. But against a Palestinian destination it may be argued: (1) the readers had had no personal contact with Jesus (2:3), an unlikely event for mid-first-century residents of Palestine; (2) the statement in 12:4 that his readers had not yet given their lives could hardly be said of Palestinian Christians of the period; (3) the generosity of the believers (10:34; 13:16) was inconsistent with the poverty of the Jerusalem church; and (4) the general tone of the letter is Hellenistic rather than rabbinical.<\/p>\nOther proposals for the destination of Hebrews include (1) Caesarea, on the supposition of Lukan authorship; (2) Syrian Antioch or Cyprus, assuming Barnabas wrote the letter; (3) Ephesus, in the light of the conversion of many Jews during Paul’s ministry in that city; (4) Colosse, noting certain similarities between the Colossian heresy and the false beliefs of the “Hebrews”; and (5) Alexandria, because of the apparent influence of the philosopher Philo Judaeus in the letter.<\/p>\nThe thesis that Hebrews was directed to a group of Jewish Christians in Rome has found favor with a number of scholars. Arguments in support of a Roman destination include the following facts: (1) The letter was first known in Rome no later than AD<\/span> 96. (2) Romans 11:13, 18 suggests that the church at Rome consisted of a Jewish-Christian minority. (3) References to persecution and suffering endured by the readers (Heb 10:32-33; 12:4) are consistent with known repressive measures exacted by the Roman authorities. (4) There is a good possibility that saints who “come from Italy” would convey greetings to their brethren in Rome. (5) The Jewish community in Rome preserved certain features of nonconformist or sectarian Judaism that would explain several notable similarities between the theology and praxis of the Qumran community and that expressed in Hebrews.<\/p>\nIt is likely that the letter was addressed to a small subgroup within a local church. The exhortation in 5:12 (rsv<\/span>)—“by this time you ought to be teachers”—hardly would have been relevant to an entire congregation. Hebrews 13:7, 24 lends further support to the theory that the letter was sent to a small group, perhaps to a “house church” within a larger assembly.<\/p>\nTentatively, one might conclude that the addressees were converts from Judaism who dwelt in the Dispersion. Hence they were familiar with OT Judaism and were acquainted with the religious philosophy of the Greek world. Possibly the readers comprised a house fellowship that tended to disassociate itself from the parent group (10:25). The existence of such house churches in Rome is confirmed by Romans 16:5, 14-15.<\/p>\nPurpose<\/p>\nIn response to the threat that his Jewish-Christian friends might renounce Christianity and revert to Judaism, the writer by a “word of exhortation” (13:22) communicated to them the finality of the Christian revelation. He sought also to inform his despondent, vacillating readers that Christ, the object of God’s final revelation, is vastly superior to the greatest of Judaism’s heroes. The author, in addition, affirmed the heavenly and eternal character of the salvation secured by Christ. Whereas the legal sacrificial system was powerless to effect the remission of sin, Christ the eternal High Priest “is able, once and forever, to save everyone who comes to God through him” (7:25, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nIn short, the writer commended to his readers the need for patient endurance amid the persecution and sufferings to which the heirs of eternal salvation are inevitably exposed. Just as Jesus, the forerunner of our faith, suffered and patiently endured in anticipation of eternal reward, so ought harassed, oppressed believers “take a new grip with your tired hands and stand firm on your shaky legs” (12:12, nlt<\/span>) in anticipation of their reception in that eternal “kingdom that cannot be destroyed” (12:28, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe author’s final purpose for writing was to proclaim the fearful judgment that awaits those who repudiate Jesus Christ. Since “our God is a consuming fire” (12:29, nlt<\/span>), “what makes us think that we can escape if we are indifferent to this great salvation” (2:3, nlt<\/span>)?<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nNext to Romans, Hebrews is the most doctrinal book in the NT. The writer develops a series of weighty arguments to demonstrate the superiority of the gospel of Christ to the religion of Judaism. Since Jesus is final both as to his person and his work, Christianity is the ultimate and normative faith. The book’s particularism runs counter to the spirit of the modern world.<\/p>\n<h5>The Superiority of the Son to Former Revelation (1:1-4)<\/h5>\nThe writer acknowledges that God revealed himself to the prophets of old in many ways—through dreams, visions, audible speech, and mighty acts. But “in these last days” (the advent of the end times, cf. 9:26) God spoke finally and definitively through his own Son (1:2). Central to the argument is the fact that in one way or another the prophets received an eternal word from God. Yet given the intimate relation of the Son to the Father, God’s latest revelation has come forth from the very depths of his own being.<\/p>\nIdentification of the Son as the pinnacle of divine revelation leads to a concise but profound statement of Christ’s person and his cosmic work. The Son reflects the glory of God in that the sum of the divine attributes brilliantly shine through his person. Moreover, he bears the very image and stamp of God’s nature (1:3), as the wax bears the impress of the seal. Jesus as God’s final word of revelation is truly the divine and eternal Son of God. Christ’s excellence is further displayed in the fact that he is the mighty agent through whom the universe was created (v 2) and by whom the cosmic order is sustained (v 3). In the moral realm he has wrought the purification of sins and now sits enthroned on God’s right hand (cf. 8:1). God’s pleasure toward the Son is seen in that he has appointed Christ heir and head of all (1:2). His name is surpassed by none save God the Father (v 4).<\/p>\n<h5>The Superiority of the Son to Angels (1:5–2:18)<\/h5>\nAngels enjoyed an exalted status in biblical and postbiblical Judaism. Traditionally the Jews believed that angels praised God upon his throne, mediated God’s revelation to men, attended to God’s will, and gave succor to the people of God. Angels were far superior to men in power and knowledge. According to the Jewish Apocrypha, angels ruled the stars and were responsible for the rise and fall of civilizations. In Qumran thought, angelic beings would engage in a final cosmic struggle with Belial and the forces of evil at the end of the age.<\/p>\nAgainst this background the writer of Hebrews argues that the Son is vastly superior to the angels. To prove his point, the author assembles a string of well-known OT texts and applies them directly to the Son. God never said of any angel, “Today I have become your Father” (Ps 2:7, nlt<\/span>). Yet just such a claim was made on behalf of the Son (Heb 1:5). When the Son incarnated himself in the world, he received the obedient worship of angels (v 6). His is the sovereignty and the eternality and the majesty at God’s right hand (vv 8, 11-12). By contrast, angels are “only servants” (v 14) that rank below the Son in dignity and might.<\/p>\nIn Hebrews 2:1-4 the writer parenthetically warns his wavering congregation of the danger of drifting away from the truth of God. If disobedience to the law mediated by angels resulted in stern punishment, how much more severe would be God’s judgment on those who trampled under foot the revelation delivered by the Son? If God’s saving grace in Christ is neglected, retribution will surely follow (2:3).<\/p>\nThe mention of angels turns the writer’s mind to Jesus’ humiliation and exaltation (2:5-18). Psalm 8, a song about the smallness and yet the significance of man, is applied to the experience of Jesus. In assuming human flesh and blood, Jesus was made “for a little while . . . lower than the angels” (Heb 2:7, nlt<\/span>). But subsequent to the completion of his earthly work, he was elevated above the angels and crowned with the glory and honor of heaven (v 9). The theological implications of Christ’s descent and ascent are carefully spelled out: Christ descended to earth (1) to bring many children to glory (v 10), (2) to destroy the devil (v 14), (3) to deliver his people from the bondage of death (v 15), and (4) to make an offering on the cross for the sins of the people (v 17). He ascended to heaven (1) to intercede on our behalf as a faithful High Priest (v 17), and (2) to succor those who are sorely tempted (v 18). The perfect summary of Christ’s person and work is given in Hebrews 2:9: “What we do see is Jesus, who ‘for a little while was made lower than the angels’ and now is ‘crowned with glory and honor’ because he suffered death for us. Yes, by God’s grace, Jesus tasted death for everyone in all the world” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>The Superiority of the Son to Moses and Joshua (3:1–4:13)<\/h5>\nJewish Christians contemplating reversion to Judaism surely believed that Moses was one of the greatest figures in Israel’s history. So esteemed was the one who led Israel out of Egypt through the wilderness and who gave them the Law that there was no one in Israel’s history so honored as Moses. Yet the author of Hebrews argues that Moses, though faithful to his calling, was but a servant in the house of God. Jesus, by contrast, was not a servant but a Son; he was not a mere dweller in the house but the very builder of the structure. Jesus, therefore, far transcends the revered figure of Moses.<\/p>\nPractical implications are drawn from Jesus’ superiority to Moses. From Psalm 95:7-11 the writer rehearses the tragic experience of Israel under Moses during the desert wanderings (Heb 3:7-19). Throughout the 40-year wilderness experience the people hardened their hearts and rebelled against God. In turn God was provoked by their stubbornness and swore that those who sinned would never enter the rest he was going to provide (vv 10-11, 18). The writer thus argues that if disobedience to God under Moses had serious consequences, forsaking Christ will be much more perilous. Hence the wavering Christians are urged to watch lest due to an evil, unbelieving heart they should fall away from the living God (v 12). Nothing short of steadfast persistence will lead to the attainment of the heavenly goal (v 14).<\/p>\nJoshua, likewise, was regarded as a great leader of Israel. Yet because of disobedience, the people under Joshua’s leadership failed to enter the rest that God had planned. That rest spoken of corresponds to the Sabbath rest of God (4:3-4), and is a concept closely related to salvation. It is a spiritual reality that is achieved by turning from our own empty works and trusting in the finished work of Christ (v 10). The author reminds the readers that “there is a special rest [a Sabbath rest] still waiting for the people of God” (v 9, nlt<\/span>), one that only Christ can provide. Christians not only benefit from this Sabbath rest in the present age but anticipate its full realization in the age to come. One of the chief means of ensuring entry into the Sabbath rest of salvation is the Word of God (v 12). The living and powerful Word penetrates the innermost depths of the soul, reveals our impoverished condition, and strengthens the trusting heart.<\/p>\n<h5>The Superiority of the Priesthood of the Son (4:14–7:28)<\/h5>\nAlmost half of Hebrews is devoted to the priesthood of Jesus Christ. The writer goes to great lengths to demonstrate that the revered Aaronic priestly system has been superseded by the High Priest “in the line of Melchizedek” (5:6; 6:20; 7:11). This central theme had been anticipated earlier when Christ was referred to as “our merciful and faithful High Priest before God” who has made atonement for sins (2:17, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nHebrews makes the claim that Jesus’ priesthood is the ultimate ground of the believers’ confidence (4:14-16). On three counts Jesus surpasses the old legal priestly order. First, he is an exalted<\/em> high priest (v 14). The Jewish high priest climbed the mount to enter the temple sanctuary. But Jesus, our great high priest, has ascended to heaven itself and entered the sanctuary on high. He ministers in no earthly tabernacle but in the very presence of God. Second, Jesus is an empathetic<\/em> high priest (v 15a). Fully God and fully man, Jesus suffers along with his people in their trials and afflictions. From heaven’s perspective he knows fully what his people are called upon to endure. He “feels” our hurts, and he does so perfectly. Finally, Jesus is a sinless<\/em> high priest (v 15b). Day in and day out (7:27), year in and year out, the Levitical priests were required to bring sacrifices for their own sins. Yet Jesus had no sin that needed cleansing, for “he is holy and blameless, unstained by sin” (v 26, nlt<\/span>). In view of Jesus’ priestly perfections, sorely tempted Christians are urged to come to the throne of grace to receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need (4:16).<\/p>\nFor those not convinced that Jesus was indeed a legitimate priest, two prerequisites for priesthood are detailed. First, if the high priest is to represent humanity before God, he must be taken from among men (5:1-2). And second, he must be called by God to high priestly office, as was Aaron (v 4). Christ has fully satisfied these qualifications. From Psalms 2:7 and 110:4 it is shown that Jesus did not take this office upon himself but was appointed by God (Heb 5:5-6). Moreover, from the obedience that he had to learn (v 8) and from the agony of the Gethsemane experience (v 7) it is clear that Jesus was in every way a man. Nevertheless, Hebrews makes it perfectly clear that Jesus was not a priest after the order of Aaron but a high priest in the line of Melchizedek (v 10).<\/p>\nAfter introducing the theme of Christ as a Melchizedekian high priest, the writer recalls that his readers were not ready for such advanced teaching. Although not new converts (5:12), his friends had remained spiritually immature and sluggish. Hence the writer issues the challenge to press on to Christian maturity, to be ready for the solid food of advanced teaching.<\/p>\nIn his digression the writer warns not only against spiritual immaturity but also against “apostasy.” The question now arises whether the author’s apostasy teaching in Hebrews 6:4-8 and 10:26-31 contradicts the NT doctrine of the perseverance of the saints. Undoubtedly it does not. Some authorities hold that those addressed were not true Christians, hence the issue is not one of apostasy. It is possible, like Judas Iscariot or Simon Magus (Acts 8:9-24), to possess considerable knowledge of the gospel and fall short of personal commitment. But the writer makes it quite clear that in the case of his addressees he is persuaded otherwise (Heb 6:9). The most reasonable view is that in these two hortatory passages the writer advances a hypothetical argument warning his friends of the utter seriousness of reverting back to Judaism. That is, if a falling away were to occur, renewal would be impossible unless Christ were to die a second time. The writer sums up the point of these difficult passages with the words “It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (10:31, nlt<\/span>). Nevertheless, followers of Christ may confidently lay hold of God’s promises, confirmed by solemn oath, to see them through their trials (6:13-18). God may be trusted to hold the believer fast.<\/p>\nHebrews 7 contains an intricate argument for the superiority of Christ’s priesthood over the old legal order. Melchizedek, the ancient priest-king of Salem (Gn 14:18-20), is regarded as a primordial type of Christ. He is “king of righteousness” and “king of peace” (Heb 7:2). The solemn priest from Salem has figuratively what Christ possesses actually: neither mother nor father, neither beginning nor end of life (v 3). Melchizedek is shown to be superior to Abraham on three counts: (1) Melchizedek blessed the patriarch (vv 1, 7); (2) he accepted tithes from Abraham (vv 2-6); and (3) Melchizedek lives on since the OT nowhere mentions his death (v 8). It follows that since Levi was in the loins of Abraham as seed (v 10), Melchizedek is superior to the Levitical priests. And inasmuch as Christ is a priest in the likeness of Melchizedek (v 15), it follows that the Son of God is more excellent than the old legal priesthood.<\/p>\nThe result is that the old Levitical priesthood has been superseded by the priesthood of Christ. The demise of the old order was inevitable, for its repetitive animal sacrifices could never effect spiritual perfection (7:11). It was a system characterized by weakness and uselessness (v 18). By contrast, Christ’s priesthood is indestructible, eternal, uninterrupted, efficacious, final, and perfect (vv 16, 21, 24-27). Forgiveness and reconciliation is possible only through Christ, our great High Priest.<\/p>\n<h5>The Superiority of the Priestly Work of the Son (8:1–10:39)<\/h5>\nSince Christ’s priestly office far excels the old order, it follows that his priestly ministration is superior to all that has gone before. The theme of Christ as high priest in a better sanctuary is introduced (8:1-5). The writer utilizes Plato’s distinction between the ideal form in heaven and the imperfect copy on earth to argue that the Levitical sanctuary and sacrifices are mere shadows of the heavenly realities: (1) Christ ministers in the true tent that is the heavenly sanctuary (vv 2, 5); (2) he discharges his high priestly service in the very presence of the Father, which results in a far more effective ministry (vv 1, 6); and (3) his oblation on the cross was the ultimate sacrifice (v 3). How unreasonable it is that his Christian readers should go back to the old Jewish priestly system!<\/p>\nChrist is the minister of a new and better covenant (8:6-13). The old covenant established by God with the nation’s fathers was not to be despised; nevertheless, it had become ineffectual and obsolete (v 13). Indeed, the prophet Jeremiah (Jer 31:31-34) foresaw the new covenant that God would inaugurate with his people. This new covenant sealed by Christ involves (1) the immediate work of the Holy Spirit on the mind and heart (Heb 8:10); (2) a personal and intimate knowledge of God (v 11); and (3) the full absolution of sins (v 12). This new and better covenant has been established on the work of Christ, the great High Priest.<\/p>\nChapter 9 gives a detailed comparison of the efficacy of priestly service under the old and new covenants. The Levitical priests ministered in a material sanctuary on earth (vv 1-5). Features of the tabernacle and its furnishings are described to highlight their obsolescence. More important, however, is the character of the sacrificial ritual conducted in the earthly sanctuary. The Jewish priests in their daily service were not permitted to enter the Holy of Holies, which contained the ark of the covenant and the mercy seat—the place of propitiation of sins (v 6). The high priest alone could enter the Holy of Holies, and then but once a year on the Day of Atonement, and only after sacrificing for his own sins (v 7). The inaccessibility of the Holy of Holies signified that access to the presence of God had not been opened. The presence of the curtain symbolized that the people had no way to the throne of God, the priests had no way, and the high priest had a limited way and only once a year. Moreover, the sacrifices brought by the Jewish priests could not purify the conscience but merely dealt with external ritual cleansing (vv 9-10). A truly effectual sacrifice must await “the time of reformation” (v 10).<\/p>\nChrist’s priestly ministration is shown to be far more efficacious. First, the Christian’s High Priest has brought a better sacrifice (9:11-14), and here we arrive at the heart of the message of Hebrews. Employing the imagery of the tabernacle, the author demonstrates that Christ our High Priest has accomplished what the Jewish priests failed to do. He entered the heavenly Holy of Holies, not repeatedly, but once<\/em> for all, thereby effecting a completed redemption (v 12). Christ brought to the altar, not the blood of bulls and goats, but his own life’s blood. The Lord did not merely lay down a material body, but he presented himself to God through the eternal Spirit (v 14). Christ’s better sacrifice thus goes beyond cleansing of the flesh to the purification of the defiled conscience.<\/p>\nSecond, Christ through his death has instituted a better covenant (9:15-23). The teaching of Hebrews 8:6-13 is developed further. The old covenant was sealed with the blood of calves and goats (9:19). But the new covenant was ratified with the blood of Christ, God’s own Son. The new covenant thus could accomplish what the old covenant merely foreshadowed—forgiveness and cleansing of sins (v 22).<\/p>\nThird, Christ ministers in a better tabernacle (9:24-28). Our Lord entered, not into a merely earthly sanctuary, but into the holy place of heaven, there to represent us (v 24). Access to the throne is not limited to one day per year, for he is continually in the presence of the Father. Nor is it necessary that repeated sacrifices be made. Christ’s single sacrifice on the cross has conquered sin once and for all (v 26). In sum, as regards the sanctuary, the covenant, and the sacrifices, the Christian’s High Priest is vastly superior to the old Jewish order.<\/p>\nIn order to drive home these crucial points, the writer in chapter 10 expands on the theme of the absolute finality of Christ’s high priestly work. The earlier argument concerning the futile character of the Levitical sacrifices (9:6-14) is repeated for emphasis (10:1-4). The Mosaic ceremonial legislation called for repetitive sacrifices, which could never perfect the worshiper (v 1). Instead of purifying one’s life, they served only as a yearly reminder of sin (v 3) until Christ should come.<\/p>\nThe writer discovers in Psalm 40:6-8 a prediction that the eternal Christ would become man for the purpose of offering himself as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Heb 10:5-10). Once again the sanctifying power of Christ’s single self-oblation is emphasized (v 10). The vivid contrast is again drawn between the ineffective ministry of the Jewish priests who stand during the daily ritual (v 11), and the effectual single sacrifice of Christ, who is now seated at the right hand of God (v 12). Since Jesus “by that one offering . . . perfected forever all those whom he is making holy” (v 14, nlt<\/span>), nothing can be added to what the seated Sovereign has accomplished (v 18).<\/p>\nIn view of the manifest superiority of Christ’s priestly office and work, the struggling Christians are exhorted to appropriate the means of grace at their disposal (10:19-39). In the midst of trials and persecution they should remember that Christ has effectively opened the way to God (vv 19-20). They are summoned to come to God in faith with hearts cleansed by Christ’s sacrifice (v 22). Those tempted to revert to legal religion should hold fast and support one another in love (vv 23-24). The means of grace afforded by corporate worship should not be neglected (v 25). In short, the wavering Jewish Christians are summoned to renewed endurance and fidelity to their Lord (vv 26-31). What God has promised to his people he will surely make good.<\/p>\n<h5>The Superiority of the Life of Faith (11:1–12:29)<\/h5>\nThe discussion of faith and endurance as the solution to despondency (10:36-38) prompts a fuller consideration of the faith theme. Faith is a prominent concept in the book of Hebrews, as attested by the fact that the word occurs some 35 times in the letter. The Pauline idea of faith as the means of legal justification is adapted to the particular circumstances of the threatened Jewish Christians. The concept of faith is broader in this book than the strictly saving faith discussed by Paul, in that it leads to spiritual salvation (11:39-40). Faith is the power by which heaven’s unseen realities are laid hold of to satisfy the soul. Faith enables the Christian disciple to view the world and interpret the flow of history from the divine perspective. Faith is the means of victory over the world of sin and woe. Through faith the believer approaches the throne of grace (4:16) with the confidence and assurance that God will enable him to overcome.<\/p>\nThe victory faith affords is amply illustrated from the history of God’s OT people. Abel, Enoch, and Noah in the primal history; Abraham, the father of faith; Moses, the leader of the young nation; and many valiant prophets and martyrs serve as living memorials to faith’s overcoming power. And yet God has something better in store for his sanctified people, the church (11:40): the reality of the living Christ.<\/p>\nYet the greatest model of steadfast endurance in suffering is Jesus, “the Originator and Perfecter of our faith” (12:2, nlt<\/span> mg). When surrounded with trials, the Christian needs to recall Christ, who in anticipation of the heavenly crown endured the cross and its shame. The Christian’s trials are trivial compared with what Jesus Christ was called upon to suffer (v 3). Moreover, for the people of God, suffering and persecution prove to be disguised blessings. The rod of discipline confirms our status as children of the living God (vv 5-10). But beyond this, the sovereign God is able to transform the Christian’s suffering into inestimable blessing (v 11). Hence the wavering saints should strive for spiritual wholeness and maturity, taking care lest they be overtaken by bitterness and resentment (v 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Final Exhortations and Benediction (13:1-25)<\/h5>\nThe writer in his closing words challenges his Christian friends to be faithful to the tasks that lie at hand. They are to show continued love to the brethren, to extend hospitality to strangers, to uphold the sanctity of marriage, to be content with what they now possess, and to be obedient to their spiritual leaders (13:1-7).<\/p>\nThe readers are warned against the trickery of the Judaizers, who would lead them astray from Jesus Christ, the one who remains “the same yesterday, today, and forever” (13:8). Spiritual determination is strengthened by recalling the example of Christ, who “suffered outside the city gates” for their salvation (v 12). As the people of God, they are challenged to follow Christ “outside the camp,” bearing abuse for him (v 13). Patient endurance is possible when the Christian realizes that he has no enduring city here (v 14). His goal is the heavenly Jerusalem, the eternal city of God.<\/p>\nThe anonymous letter to the unknown “Hebrews” closes with a glorious benediction. The Christian’s God is described as the great “God of peace” (13:20), and Jesus is “the great Shepherd of the sheep,” who established a new and eternal covenant and then rose triumphant from the dead. And the promise is made to the trusting soul that the triune God would “equip you with all you need for doing his will” (v 21, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe letter to the Hebrews is rich in doctrinal teaching. It discloses more about the historical Jesus than any other NT letter. It alone explains the atoning work of Christ under the rubric of the Melchizedekian priest. The letter’s discussion of repentance, justification, sanctification, and perseverance makes it a mine of salvation teaching. Its explication of old and new covenants, impending judgment, and the world to come make a significant contribution to Christian theology. And the letter’s teaching on faith, endurance, and the practical Christian combine to make Hebrews one of the most important documents God has given to the church.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEBREWS, Letter to the One of the most profound and enigmatic books in the NT. The identity of its author, the time of its writing, and the people and place to which it was sent are all shrouded in mystery. Yet, in spite of the uncertainty, Hebrews remains one of the most timely and relevant books in the Bible. Some 300 years ago John Owen, the English Puritan, appropriately remarked: “No doubt the Epistle next in importance to Romans is this to the Hebrews.” The letter is both doctrinal and ...","summary_en":"HEBREWS, Letter to the One of the most profound and enigmatic books in the NT. The identity of its author, the time of its writing, and the people and place to which it was sent are all shrouded in mystery. Yet, in spite of the uncertainty, Hebrews remains one of the most timely and relevant books in the Bible. Some 300 years ago John Owen, the English Puritan, appropriately remarked: “No doubt the Epistle next in importance to Romans is this to the Hebrews.” The letter is both doctrinal and ...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19014,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Jeremiah","title_en":"Book of Jeremiah","content_ro":"<h3>JEREMIAH, Book of<\/h3>\n\nOT prophetic book, second in the canonical order of the Prophets.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Authenticity<\/p>\n• The Book of Jeremiah and the Septuagint<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Origin and Destination<\/p>\n• Purpose<\/p>\n• Teaching<\/p>\n• Outline and Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nFew doubt that the prophet from Anathoth wrote the book of Jeremiah, yet questions persist concerning some parts, particularly chapter 52. The use of the third person cannot be used to discredit Jeremiah’s authorship, for Jeremiah used the first and third person, and even the second person, in the same context. For example, 32:6-7 reads: “Jeremiah said [third person], ‘The word of the Lord<\/span> came to me: [first person] . . . your uncle will come to you [second person]’ ” (rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe problem of the passage of time provides the strongest argument against the Jeremian authorship of chapter 52. Jeremiah was born about 657 BC<\/span>. Evil-merodoch released Jehoiachin (52:31) about 95 years later. Jeremiah 52:33 summarizes the continuation of events beyond this time. The problem of location also argues against Jeremian authorship, for Jeremiah took up residence in Egypt (43:6-7) while Jehoiachin dwelt in Babylon. Note also that Jeremiah concludes his writing with chapter 51, making chapter 52 a true editorial appendix. Since chapter 52 parallels 2 Kings 24:18–25:30, it may be that other portions of Jeremiah that parallel sections of 2 Kings may have been written by someone other than Jeremiah.<\/p>\nThe following table shows such portions and includes harmonic passages in 2 Chronicles. The first column shows historical (chronological) sequence. The last column provides a brief condensation of content.<\/p>\nBaruch served as the secretary for Jeremiah. The relationship between the two men apparently lasted many years; the prophet gave a word of encouragement as he blessed his helper (45:5). According to the custom of the people, it would have been legitimate for the scribe to write some of the prophet’s messages in his own words. This would not deny inspiration.<\/p>\nAuthenticity<\/p>\nThat Jeremiah lived and actually wrote the major part of the book bearing his name is authenticated by numerous references in both biblical and nonbiblical sources (e.g., Dn 9; Ecclus 49; Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 10; Talmud: Baba Bathra<\/em>). The veracity of the historical sections of Jeremiah have abundant confirmation in contemporary biblical books and in the secular histories preserved in Babylon, Egypt, and Persia.<\/p>\nHigher critics sought to discredit the portions of Jeremiah that were omitted by the Septuagint, or to credit passages to a later writer because of style differences (e.g., chs 30–33) or spelling differences (as found in chs 27–29) or linguistic problems (as in 10:11, written in Aramaic, but this may be a gloss). Another reason for discrediting Jeremiah’s authorship is that critics dated some prophecies later than indicated in the context. This results from their requiring that predictive writing follow the record of its fulfillment. None of these reasons is sufficient cause for doubting authenticity. The Hebrew text deserves priority over the Septuagint. Aramaic contact with the Jews became commonplace during this period (cf. Ezr 4–7; Dn 2–7) and therefore explains the presence of Aramaic. Different styles may be expected from the same writer due to differing circumstances and differing purposes. Baruch may have been inspired to write parts of this book and\/or edited what Jeremiah wrote. Prediction preceding fulfillment presents no problem for believers.<\/p>\n\nThe Book of Jeremiah and the Septuagint<\/p>\nThe special problems of the Septuagint translation of Jeremiah demand attention. The Septuagint translators evidently made an inaccurate translation. About 2,300 Hebrew words are omitted from the Septuagint. After chapter 23, the mistranslation, omissions, and mixed chronological order indicate confusion. However, the Dead Sea Scrolls display texts with both the Hebrew and the Septuagint order, indicating the antiquity of both editions. Both have suffered corruption at the hands of scribes and the ravages of the ages. The Septuagint evidently veers much further from the original, yet it has invaluable clues to help suggest answers to some textual problems. The most evident major shift in the Septuagint consists of the removal of chapters 46–51 of the Hebrew order, and the placement of them in the spot from which 25:13b-14 was removed. These chapters are renumbered 26–31 but are mixed and changed considerably from the order of the Hebrew Masoretic Text.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThis is fully discussed in the previous entry. See<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1.<\/p>\n\nDate<\/p>\nThe chronological sequence of the messages of Jeremiah constitutes a major problem that cannot be wholly solved. Nonetheless, the book was written during Jeremiah’s ministry (c. 627–586 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nOrigin and Destination<\/p>\nAfter beginning his ministry in Anathoth, Jeremiah moved to Jerusalem, where he remained until he was forced to join the disobedient refugees who arrived in Egypt about 584 BC<\/span>. Until the deportation of Jehoiachin (597 BC<\/span>), Jeremiah addressed his messages to the king and the people residing in Judah. Later messages addressed the same group, plus the captives in Babylon (e.g., ch 29). After the departure to Egypt, he addressed Jews in that land.<\/p>\nPurpose<\/p>\nPart of God’s commission to Jeremiah stated the purpose of Jeremiah’s ministry: “Today I appoint you to stand up against nations and kingdoms. You are to uproot some and tear them down, to destroy and overthrow them. You are to build others up and plant them” (1:10, nlt<\/span>). The first four parts of the commission required that Jeremiah, appointed as a “chief governor” over nations, should wreck the existing religious and social structures by his preaching against moral and spiritual sin. Doubtless, the physical destruction caused by the Egyptians, Assyrians, and Babylonians was the accoutrement for the truth uttered by the prophet. Jeremiah is consistent in his blasts at moral and religious wickedness, his call to submit to the punishment that God gives through Babylon, and his assurance that such submission will lead to blessing. When Zedekiah asks advice (38:14), we know what Jeremiah will say. When the captains of the refugees ask if they should go to Egypt, we already know the answer (42:3). We may also anticipate the obdurate rejection of God’s message on the part of the inquiring people, who apparently want to know God’s will but have no desire to obey it.<\/p>\nNevertheless, part of Jeremiah’s purpose focuses on the most distant future when the new covenant will supplant the old (31:31-37), and a transformed people bent on obedience rather than sin will receive God’s promised kingdom.<\/p>\nTeaching<\/p>\nNational sin brings national punishment. No truth blazes so clearly as this. Gentiles as well as Jews stand under the same judgment, for God is not the God of Israel only.<\/p>\nIndividuals are not overlooked in divine judgments on nations. God sets before each the way of life and the way of death (21:8) and appeals to each to choose life (27:13).<\/p>\nJeremiah illustrates human depravity by questioning if people can change their skin color or leopards their spots (13:23). The depths of depravity reach beyond man’s ability to measure (17:9-10). People even love falsehood (5:30-31). Yet God promises to transform willing subjects who call on him (33:3) by giving them a “new heart” (24:7; 32:38-41) as the climatic provision of the new covenant (31:33-35). The Messiah, who accomplishes the saving work, is called the Lord our Righteousness, the King, the righteous Branch, the Branch of David (23:5-6; 33:15-16).<\/p>\nA future nation will be made up of individuals who accept this salvation. Passing through the night of tribulation as of travail (30:6-7), the Jews will understand the true identity of their Messiah, will believe and receive him with repentant sorrow, will be cleansed (33:8), and will be regathered from all countries (32:37) by the omnipotent God (v 27).<\/p>\nOutline and Content<\/p>\nThough many see no logical order, a careful reading of Jeremiah will reveal a grouping on the basis of content, as suggested by the following outline:<\/p>\n<li> I. Introduction (1)<\/li>\n<li> II. Oracles against the Jews (2–25)<\/li>\n<li>III. History—Signs and Sufferings of Jeremiah before the Siege (26–29)<\/li>\n<li> IV. The Book of Hope written during the Siege (30–33)<\/li>\n<li> V. History—Signs and Sufferings of Jeremiah after the Siege (34–45)<\/li>\n<li> VI. Oracles against the Nations (46–51)<\/li>\n<li>VII. Conclusion (52)<\/li>\nThe prophet opens his ministry with a series of utterances against the sins of Jerusalem (2:1–3:5), followed by similar messages (through ch 4), concluding with words of judgment (chs 5–6). The message in the temple gate (chs 7–10) leads into the proclamation against covenant breakers (chs 11–13). The lamentation over the drought (ch 14) and subsequent miseries (ch 15) compares with many similar expressions of grief. Jeremiah did not differ from other prophets in his use of object lessons. The rotted linen waistband (ch 13), the broken jug (ch 19), figs (ch 24), and ox yoke (chs 27–28) may be supplemented by human object lessons (ch 35), and even the prophet himself, whose celibacy (16:1-4), resistance to sympathetic consolation (16:5-7), and withdrawal from feasts (16:8-9) all served to illustrate and confirm his message.<\/p>\nPlaces where Jeremiah proclaimed his messages helped bear home his point. He stood in the public gate, where kings came and went, to proclaim that judgment (fire) would come through the gate (17:19, 27; 39:3). Then he went to the potter’s house (ch 18), and then to Hinnom or Topath, which would be called the Valley of Slaughter (ch 19).<\/p>\nThe persecution suffered by Jeremiah first hinted at (1:8), then predicted (v 19), expresses its venom privately from his home village (11:19-23). The prophet’s kindred join the opposition (12:6). Public opposition brings beatings and the stocks (20:2-3). Jeremiah prefers to keep silent rather than to speak and suffer (v 9), but he cannot withhold the word that is as fire in his bones. The result: all his familiars reproached, derided, terrorized, and denounced him, then sought his death (vv 7-18). Jeremiah escaped death at the hands of priests, prophets, and people only because he had a few faithful friends (26:8-24). When his prophecies began to materialize, hatred mounted. He was beaten and put into a dungeon for many days (37:14-17) on a false charge. Temporary relief at the guardhouse (v 21) lasted only a few days. Officials clamored again for his death (38:4) and put him into a cistern, where he sank in the mire (v 6). His rescue (v 10) preserved his life, but his imprisonment at the guardhouse continued (v 28). His writings were cut up and burned (36:23); his words were denied and rejected (43:1-7; 44:16).<\/p>\nThe “Book of Hope“ (chs 30–33) does contain some words of judgment (32:28-35), and other sections of the prophecy have a few bright spots (3:11-18; 16:14-16; 23:2-8; 29:10-14), but in a volume otherwise dark, these four chapters bring pleasant relief. The climax of hope, as indicated also in the longest NT quotation from Jeremiah (see Heb 8:8-12), predicts a new covenant (31:31-40). Other prophecies also describe the end of the Mosaic law and sacrament (e.g., 3:16), and the new covenant (32:40; 33:19-26).<\/p>\nLittle is known of Jeremiah’s activity or messages from c. 594–589 BC<\/span>. Zedekiah’s counselors made clandestine plans for throwing off Babylon’s yoke by alliances with neighbor nations. A traitor may have reported the conspiracy to Babylon (perhaps Edom). After Babylon attacked, Zedekiah sought a hopeful report from Jeremiah but did not get it.<\/p>\nThe Recabite faithfulness to the Nazarite vow (ch 35) dates to the days of Jehoiakim but as an object lesson fits the siege context. Recabites received a human command that they obeyed; Jews received a divine command that they rejected. Recabites will be blessed (35:18-19); Judah, judged (vv 15-17). The reading of the scroll to Jehoiakim and his scornful rejection of it (ch 36) illustrates the prophetic assertion (35:15) that destruction follows the rejection of God’s message given through the prophets.<\/p>\nThe siege comes into focus in chapter 37 with another inquiry from Zedekiah (the nonchronological chs 35–36 serve as an illustrative parenthesis). Jeremiah 37:11 moves forward to the time of the lifting of the siege of 589 BC<\/span> when Nebuchadnezzar drove Pharaoh Hophra’s army back to Egypt. During the reprieve, Jeremiah sought to attend a meeting of relatives to settle family matters at or near Anathoth. Perhaps the trip involved initiating the purchase that would be made two years later (32:6-15). However, as he was leaving the city, he was arrested for desertion to the Babylonians and jailed in a dungeon cell until Zedekiah granted him privileged prisoner status.<\/p>\nThe king’s officers had ample cause for the accusation of sedition: Jeremiah had encouraged desertion (21:9; 38:2). Traitors deserved death, and this was their verdict against Jeremiah (38:4-5). The violence of the time encouraged the officers to select a cruel method of execution: let Jeremiah starve and bury himself in the mire at the bottom of an abandoned cistern. A sympathetic Ethiopian, Ebed-melech, made the rescue. Immediately, the unadulterated prophecies of judgment came forth again from Jeremiah’s lips, including a message to the king that reflected Jeremiah’s own recent experience: “[Your friends] have betrayed and misled you. When your feet sank in the mud, they left you to your fate” (38:22, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nJeremiah 39:1–43:7 records history from the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span> to the flight into Egypt, including the liberation of Jeremiah (ch 39), appointment and assassination of Gedaliah (chs 40–41), a warning from God against going to Egypt (ch 42), and the obdurate disobedience of the people (43:1-7).<\/p>\nThe latest writings of Jeremiah are found in chapter 44. The audience consisted of idolatrous Jews (44:4-6) gathered from various parts of Egypt as far as Aswan (Pathros). Jeremiah repeated the appeal of former prophets to reject false gods in favor of Jehovah, but to no avail (44:15-16).<\/p>\nThe message to Baruch (ch 45), written about 605 BC<\/span>, is placed here to round out the main part of the book, which begins with the commission to “break down” and “pluck up” (1:10) and concludes with the same Hebrew words (45:4). If Baruch had ambition to obtain status in the Judean court like his brother Seraiah (51:59), he was advised that it would be useless because disaster would come, as the preceding chapters indicate.<\/p>\nThe oracles against the nations (46–51), introduced by a title superscription (46:1), constitute a distinct stylistic division similar to Isaiah 13–23, Ezekiel 25–32, and Amos 1:3–2:16.<\/p>\nSome of the prophecies against foreign nations in Jeremiah carry dates that show that they were written at different points during his ministry but were collected together for the book.<\/p>\nThe prophecy against Egypt opens with a colorful description of Egypt’s expulsion from Carchemish (605 BC<\/span>) after a short occupancy (Jer 46:1-12). The second message (vv 13-26) may picture the attack on Egypt in 601 BC<\/span> when Neco stopped Nebuchadnezzar at the border; the attack in 589 BC<\/span> when Hophra lost in his attempt to aid Zedekiah; or (most probably) the invasion of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar in 568 BC<\/span>, when Babylon took advantage of the weakness of Egypt to occupy it. At that time Nebuchadnezzar set up his judgment throne as predicted (43:10) and meted out death sentences to all rebels, including those Jews who might have been implicated in anti-Babylonian conspiracies. The conclusion of the Egypt oracle repeats part of the Book of Hope (46:27-28, cf. 30:10-11).<\/p>\nMessages against Edom, Arabia, Phoenician cities, and Ammon generally condemn pride, cruelty, and idolatry. The oracle against Elam is unique. No other prophet speaks judgment against this people, whose dwelling east of Babylon meant rare contact with Judah. Jeremiah predicted that Elam would be doomed, then restored. Ezekiel counts Elamites among the inhabitants of Sheol (Ez 32:24).<\/p>\nThe final judgment indicates the unbiased attitude of the prophet. His messages placed him in an advantageous position with the Babylonians, who treated him with respect and kindness, in contrast to their cruelty to other Jews. But when God spoke against Babylon, Jeremiah uttered God’s words without respect to his own comfort, just as he had spoken against Egypt when silence would have been logical for self-preservation.<\/p>\nChapter 51 concludes “the words of Jeremiah.”<\/p>\nChapter 52 repeats historical facts previously stated prophetically by Jeremiah, and partially recorded also as history in chapter 39 (cf. 2 Kgs 25 and 2 Chr 36). The editor of Jeremiah evidently desired to climax the book with a historical confirmation of Jeremiah’s prophecy, but he included facts beyond those contained elsewhere.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Jeremiah (Person) #1; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JEREMIAH, Book of<\/h3>\n\nOT prophetic book, second in the canonical order of the Prophets.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Authenticity<\/p>\n• The Book of Jeremiah and the Septuagint<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Origin and Destination<\/p>\n• Purpose<\/p>\n• Teaching<\/p>\n• Outline and Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nFew doubt that the prophet from Anathoth wrote the book of Jeremiah, yet questions persist concerning some parts, particularly chapter 52. The use of the third person cannot be used to discredit Jeremiah’s authorship, for Jeremiah used the first and third person, and even the second person, in the same context. For example, 32:6-7 reads: “Jeremiah said [third person], ‘The word of the Lord<\/span> came to me: [first person] . . . your uncle will come to you [second person]’ ” (rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe problem of the passage of time provides the strongest argument against the Jeremian authorship of chapter 52. Jeremiah was born about 657 BC<\/span>. Evil-merodoch released Jehoiachin (52:31) about 95 years later. Jeremiah 52:33 summarizes the continuation of events beyond this time. The problem of location also argues against Jeremian authorship, for Jeremiah took up residence in Egypt (43:6-7) while Jehoiachin dwelt in Babylon. Note also that Jeremiah concludes his writing with chapter 51, making chapter 52 a true editorial appendix. Since chapter 52 parallels 2 Kings 24:18–25:30, it may be that other portions of Jeremiah that parallel sections of 2 Kings may have been written by someone other than Jeremiah.<\/p>\nThe following table shows such portions and includes harmonic passages in 2 Chronicles. The first column shows historical (chronological) sequence. The last column provides a brief condensation of content.<\/p>\nBaruch served as the secretary for Jeremiah. The relationship between the two men apparently lasted many years; the prophet gave a word of encouragement as he blessed his helper (45:5). According to the custom of the people, it would have been legitimate for the scribe to write some of the prophet’s messages in his own words. This would not deny inspiration.<\/p>\nAuthenticity<\/p>\nThat Jeremiah lived and actually wrote the major part of the book bearing his name is authenticated by numerous references in both biblical and nonbiblical sources (e.g., Dn 9; Ecclus 49; Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 10; Talmud: Baba Bathra<\/em>). The veracity of the historical sections of Jeremiah have abundant confirmation in contemporary biblical books and in the secular histories preserved in Babylon, Egypt, and Persia.<\/p>\nHigher critics sought to discredit the portions of Jeremiah that were omitted by the Septuagint, or to credit passages to a later writer because of style differences (e.g., chs 30–33) or spelling differences (as found in chs 27–29) or linguistic problems (as in 10:11, written in Aramaic, but this may be a gloss). Another reason for discrediting Jeremiah’s authorship is that critics dated some prophecies later than indicated in the context. This results from their requiring that predictive writing follow the record of its fulfillment. None of these reasons is sufficient cause for doubting authenticity. The Hebrew text deserves priority over the Septuagint. Aramaic contact with the Jews became commonplace during this period (cf. Ezr 4–7; Dn 2–7) and therefore explains the presence of Aramaic. Different styles may be expected from the same writer due to differing circumstances and differing purposes. Baruch may have been inspired to write parts of this book and\/or edited what Jeremiah wrote. Prediction preceding fulfillment presents no problem for believers.<\/p>\n\nThe Book of Jeremiah and the Septuagint<\/p>\nThe special problems of the Septuagint translation of Jeremiah demand attention. The Septuagint translators evidently made an inaccurate translation. About 2,300 Hebrew words are omitted from the Septuagint. After chapter 23, the mistranslation, omissions, and mixed chronological order indicate confusion. However, the Dead Sea Scrolls display texts with both the Hebrew and the Septuagint order, indicating the antiquity of both editions. Both have suffered corruption at the hands of scribes and the ravages of the ages. The Septuagint evidently veers much further from the original, yet it has invaluable clues to help suggest answers to some textual problems. The most evident major shift in the Septuagint consists of the removal of chapters 46–51 of the Hebrew order, and the placement of them in the spot from which 25:13b-14 was removed. These chapters are renumbered 26–31 but are mixed and changed considerably from the order of the Hebrew Masoretic Text.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThis is fully discussed in the previous entry. See<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1.<\/p>\n\nDate<\/p>\nThe chronological sequence of the messages of Jeremiah constitutes a major problem that cannot be wholly solved. Nonetheless, the book was written during Jeremiah’s ministry (c. 627–586 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nOrigin and Destination<\/p>\nAfter beginning his ministry in Anathoth, Jeremiah moved to Jerusalem, where he remained until he was forced to join the disobedient refugees who arrived in Egypt about 584 BC<\/span>. Until the deportation of Jehoiachin (597 BC<\/span>), Jeremiah addressed his messages to the king and the people residing in Judah. Later messages addressed the same group, plus the captives in Babylon (e.g., ch 29). After the departure to Egypt, he addressed Jews in that land.<\/p>\nPurpose<\/p>\nPart of God’s commission to Jeremiah stated the purpose of Jeremiah’s ministry: “Today I appoint you to stand up against nations and kingdoms. You are to uproot some and tear them down, to destroy and overthrow them. You are to build others up and plant them” (1:10, nlt<\/span>). The first four parts of the commission required that Jeremiah, appointed as a “chief governor” over nations, should wreck the existing religious and social structures by his preaching against moral and spiritual sin. Doubtless, the physical destruction caused by the Egyptians, Assyrians, and Babylonians was the accoutrement for the truth uttered by the prophet. Jeremiah is consistent in his blasts at moral and religious wickedness, his call to submit to the punishment that God gives through Babylon, and his assurance that such submission will lead to blessing. When Zedekiah asks advice (38:14), we know what Jeremiah will say. When the captains of the refugees ask if they should go to Egypt, we already know the answer (42:3). We may also anticipate the obdurate rejection of God’s message on the part of the inquiring people, who apparently want to know God’s will but have no desire to obey it.<\/p>\nNevertheless, part of Jeremiah’s purpose focuses on the most distant future when the new covenant will supplant the old (31:31-37), and a transformed people bent on obedience rather than sin will receive God’s promised kingdom.<\/p>\nTeaching<\/p>\nNational sin brings national punishment. No truth blazes so clearly as this. Gentiles as well as Jews stand under the same judgment, for God is not the God of Israel only.<\/p>\nIndividuals are not overlooked in divine judgments on nations. God sets before each the way of life and the way of death (21:8) and appeals to each to choose life (27:13).<\/p>\nJeremiah illustrates human depravity by questioning if people can change their skin color or leopards their spots (13:23). The depths of depravity reach beyond man’s ability to measure (17:9-10). People even love falsehood (5:30-31). Yet God promises to transform willing subjects who call on him (33:3) by giving them a “new heart” (24:7; 32:38-41) as the climatic provision of the new covenant (31:33-35). The Messiah, who accomplishes the saving work, is called the Lord our Righteousness, the King, the righteous Branch, the Branch of David (23:5-6; 33:15-16).<\/p>\nA future nation will be made up of individuals who accept this salvation. Passing through the night of tribulation as of travail (30:6-7), the Jews will understand the true identity of their Messiah, will believe and receive him with repentant sorrow, will be cleansed (33:8), and will be regathered from all countries (32:37) by the omnipotent God (v 27).<\/p>\nOutline and Content<\/p>\nThough many see no logical order, a careful reading of Jeremiah will reveal a grouping on the basis of content, as suggested by the following outline:<\/p>\n<li> I. Introduction (1)<\/li>\n<li> II. Oracles against the Jews (2–25)<\/li>\n<li>III. History—Signs and Sufferings of Jeremiah before the Siege (26–29)<\/li>\n<li> IV. The Book of Hope written during the Siege (30–33)<\/li>\n<li> V. History—Signs and Sufferings of Jeremiah after the Siege (34–45)<\/li>\n<li> VI. Oracles against the Nations (46–51)<\/li>\n<li>VII. Conclusion (52)<\/li>\nThe prophet opens his ministry with a series of utterances against the sins of Jerusalem (2:1–3:5), followed by similar messages (through ch 4), concluding with words of judgment (chs 5–6). The message in the temple gate (chs 7–10) leads into the proclamation against covenant breakers (chs 11–13). The lamentation over the drought (ch 14) and subsequent miseries (ch 15) compares with many similar expressions of grief. Jeremiah did not differ from other prophets in his use of object lessons. The rotted linen waistband (ch 13), the broken jug (ch 19), figs (ch 24), and ox yoke (chs 27–28) may be supplemented by human object lessons (ch 35), and even the prophet himself, whose celibacy (16:1-4), resistance to sympathetic consolation (16:5-7), and withdrawal from feasts (16:8-9) all served to illustrate and confirm his message.<\/p>\nPlaces where Jeremiah proclaimed his messages helped bear home his point. He stood in the public gate, where kings came and went, to proclaim that judgment (fire) would come through the gate (17:19, 27; 39:3). Then he went to the potter’s house (ch 18), and then to Hinnom or Topath, which would be called the Valley of Slaughter (ch 19).<\/p>\nThe persecution suffered by Jeremiah first hinted at (1:8), then predicted (v 19), expresses its venom privately from his home village (11:19-23). The prophet’s kindred join the opposition (12:6). Public opposition brings beatings and the stocks (20:2-3). Jeremiah prefers to keep silent rather than to speak and suffer (v 9), but he cannot withhold the word that is as fire in his bones. The result: all his familiars reproached, derided, terrorized, and denounced him, then sought his death (vv 7-18). Jeremiah escaped death at the hands of priests, prophets, and people only because he had a few faithful friends (26:8-24). When his prophecies began to materialize, hatred mounted. He was beaten and put into a dungeon for many days (37:14-17) on a false charge. Temporary relief at the guardhouse (v 21) lasted only a few days. Officials clamored again for his death (38:4) and put him into a cistern, where he sank in the mire (v 6). His rescue (v 10) preserved his life, but his imprisonment at the guardhouse continued (v 28). His writings were cut up and burned (36:23); his words were denied and rejected (43:1-7; 44:16).<\/p>\nThe “Book of Hope“ (chs 30–33) does contain some words of judgment (32:28-35), and other sections of the prophecy have a few bright spots (3:11-18; 16:14-16; 23:2-8; 29:10-14), but in a volume otherwise dark, these four chapters bring pleasant relief. The climax of hope, as indicated also in the longest NT quotation from Jeremiah (see Heb 8:8-12), predicts a new covenant (31:31-40). Other prophecies also describe the end of the Mosaic law and sacrament (e.g., 3:16), and the new covenant (32:40; 33:19-26).<\/p>\nLittle is known of Jeremiah’s activity or messages from c. 594–589 BC<\/span>. Zedekiah’s counselors made clandestine plans for throwing off Babylon’s yoke by alliances with neighbor nations. A traitor may have reported the conspiracy to Babylon (perhaps Edom). After Babylon attacked, Zedekiah sought a hopeful report from Jeremiah but did not get it.<\/p>\nThe Recabite faithfulness to the Nazarite vow (ch 35) dates to the days of Jehoiakim but as an object lesson fits the siege context. Recabites received a human command that they obeyed; Jews received a divine command that they rejected. Recabites will be blessed (35:18-19); Judah, judged (vv 15-17). The reading of the scroll to Jehoiakim and his scornful rejection of it (ch 36) illustrates the prophetic assertion (35:15) that destruction follows the rejection of God’s message given through the prophets.<\/p>\nThe siege comes into focus in chapter 37 with another inquiry from Zedekiah (the nonchronological chs 35–36 serve as an illustrative parenthesis). Jeremiah 37:11 moves forward to the time of the lifting of the siege of 589 BC<\/span> when Nebuchadnezzar drove Pharaoh Hophra’s army back to Egypt. During the reprieve, Jeremiah sought to attend a meeting of relatives to settle family matters at or near Anathoth. Perhaps the trip involved initiating the purchase that would be made two years later (32:6-15). However, as he was leaving the city, he was arrested for desertion to the Babylonians and jailed in a dungeon cell until Zedekiah granted him privileged prisoner status.<\/p>\nThe king’s officers had ample cause for the accusation of sedition: Jeremiah had encouraged desertion (21:9; 38:2). Traitors deserved death, and this was their verdict against Jeremiah (38:4-5). The violence of the time encouraged the officers to select a cruel method of execution: let Jeremiah starve and bury himself in the mire at the bottom of an abandoned cistern. A sympathetic Ethiopian, Ebed-melech, made the rescue. Immediately, the unadulterated prophecies of judgment came forth again from Jeremiah’s lips, including a message to the king that reflected Jeremiah’s own recent experience: “[Your friends] have betrayed and misled you. When your feet sank in the mud, they left you to your fate” (38:22, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nJeremiah 39:1–43:7 records history from the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span> to the flight into Egypt, including the liberation of Jeremiah (ch 39), appointment and assassination of Gedaliah (chs 40–41), a warning from God against going to Egypt (ch 42), and the obdurate disobedience of the people (43:1-7).<\/p>\nThe latest writings of Jeremiah are found in chapter 44. The audience consisted of idolatrous Jews (44:4-6) gathered from various parts of Egypt as far as Aswan (Pathros). Jeremiah repeated the appeal of former prophets to reject false gods in favor of Jehovah, but to no avail (44:15-16).<\/p>\nThe message to Baruch (ch 45), written about 605 BC<\/span>, is placed here to round out the main part of the book, which begins with the commission to “break down” and “pluck up” (1:10) and concludes with the same Hebrew words (45:4). If Baruch had ambition to obtain status in the Judean court like his brother Seraiah (51:59), he was advised that it would be useless because disaster would come, as the preceding chapters indicate.<\/p>\nThe oracles against the nations (46–51), introduced by a title superscription (46:1), constitute a distinct stylistic division similar to Isaiah 13–23, Ezekiel 25–32, and Amos 1:3–2:16.<\/p>\nSome of the prophecies against foreign nations in Jeremiah carry dates that show that they were written at different points during his ministry but were collected together for the book.<\/p>\nThe prophecy against Egypt opens with a colorful description of Egypt’s expulsion from Carchemish (605 BC<\/span>) after a short occupancy (Jer 46:1-12). The second message (vv 13-26) may picture the attack on Egypt in 601 BC<\/span> when Neco stopped Nebuchadnezzar at the border; the attack in 589 BC<\/span> when Hophra lost in his attempt to aid Zedekiah; or (most probably) the invasion of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar in 568 BC<\/span>, when Babylon took advantage of the weakness of Egypt to occupy it. At that time Nebuchadnezzar set up his judgment throne as predicted (43:10) and meted out death sentences to all rebels, including those Jews who might have been implicated in anti-Babylonian conspiracies. The conclusion of the Egypt oracle repeats part of the Book of Hope (46:27-28, cf. 30:10-11).<\/p>\nMessages against Edom, Arabia, Phoenician cities, and Ammon generally condemn pride, cruelty, and idolatry. The oracle against Elam is unique. No other prophet speaks judgment against this people, whose dwelling east of Babylon meant rare contact with Judah. Jeremiah predicted that Elam would be doomed, then restored. Ezekiel counts Elamites among the inhabitants of Sheol (Ez 32:24).<\/p>\nThe final judgment indicates the unbiased attitude of the prophet. His messages placed him in an advantageous position with the Babylonians, who treated him with respect and kindness, in contrast to their cruelty to other Jews. But when God spoke against Babylon, Jeremiah uttered God’s words without respect to his own comfort, just as he had spoken against Egypt when silence would have been logical for self-preservation.<\/p>\nChapter 51 concludes “the words of Jeremiah.”<\/p>\nChapter 52 repeats historical facts previously stated prophetically by Jeremiah, and partially recorded also as history in chapter 39 (cf. 2 Kgs 25 and 2 Chr 36). The editor of Jeremiah evidently desired to climax the book with a historical confirmation of Jeremiah’s prophecy, but he included facts beyond those contained elsewhere.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Jeremiah (Person) #1; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JEREMIAH, Book of OT prophetic book, second in the canonical order of the Prophets. Preview • Author • Authenticity • The Book of Jeremiah and the Septuagint • Background • Date • Origin and Destination • Purpose • Teaching • Outline and Content Author Few doubt that the prophet from Anathoth wrote the book of Jeremiah, yet questions persist concerning some parts, particularly chapter 52. The use of the third person cannot be used to discredit Jeremiah’s authorship, for Jeremiah used the firs...","summary_en":"JEREMIAH, Book of OT prophetic book, second in the canonical order of the Prophets. Preview • Author • Authenticity • The Book of Jeremiah and the Septuagint • Background • Date • Origin and Destination • Purpose • Teaching • Outline and Content Author Few doubt that the prophet from Anathoth wrote the book of Jeremiah, yet questions persist concerning some parts, particularly chapter 52. The use of the third person cannot be used to discredit Jeremiah’s authorship, for Jeremiah used the firs...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23506,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\nThe supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\nThe Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\nThe institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\nIn Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\nThe Time of the Institution<\/p>\nAll of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nVarious explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\nThus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, niv<\/span>).<\/p>\nWords and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\nThe association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\nThe actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\nThis specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\nIt must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\nJesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\nThe meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\nAll four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\nIn Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\nPaul’s Teaching<\/p>\nIn Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\nTo partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word koinonia<\/span>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\nOf the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\nThe supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\nThe Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\nThe institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\nIn Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\nThe Time of the Institution<\/p>\nAll of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nVarious explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\nThus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, niv<\/span>).<\/p>\nWords and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\nThe association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\nThe actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\nThis specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\nIt must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\nJesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\nThe meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\nAll four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\nIn Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\nPaul’s Teaching<\/p>\nIn Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\nTo partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word koinonia<\/span>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\nOf the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25396,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Messiah","title_en":"Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\nTitle derived from the Hebrew, mashiach<\/span>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (<\/em>mashach<\/span>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\nIsrael’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\nConcluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\nMessiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\nJewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\nAmong Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\nWhile later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\nWhile the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\nThe nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\nIt is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\nThe writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\nPsalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\nJeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\nWhile the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\nMessiah in the New Testament<\/p>\nThe NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\nThe Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\nFamily genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\nThe messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\nThe Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\nTitle derived from the Hebrew, mashiach<\/span>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (<\/em>mashach<\/span>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\nIsrael’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\nConcluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\nMessiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\nJewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\nAmong Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\nWhile later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\nWhile the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\nThe nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\nIt is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\nThe writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\nPsalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\nJeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\nWhile the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\nMessiah in the New Testament<\/p>\nThe NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\nThe Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\nFamily genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\nThe messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\nThe Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","summary_en":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27397,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"New","title_en":"New","content_ro":"<h3>NEW<\/h3>\nThat which has just been made or come into existence—often replacing that which already existed, thereby turning the old into new.<\/p>\nThat the second part of the Bible is called the New<\/em> Testament indicates how fundamental the idea of “new” is to biblical revelation. Many key theological expressions incorporate the idea: new creation (2 Cor 5:17), new birth (Jn 3:3), new man (Eph 2:15; Col 3:10), new commandment (Jn 13:34), new covenant (Jer 31:31), new life (Rom 6:4), and various others.<\/p>\nThe Expectation of the New<\/p>\nThe totality of the expectation of the new<\/em> is best expressed in Jeremiah and Ezekiel and in the reference in the Psalter to the “new song” to be given to the people to sing (e.g., Pss 33:3; 40:3; 149:1; cf., also Is 42:10). Jeremiah speaks of the day when God will make a new covenant with the house of Israel (Jer 31:31-34; cf. Ez 34:25-31; 37:26-28). In contrast with the old, this new covenant will be written upon the heart—that is, it will be internalized. Similarly Ezekiel (Ez 36:22-32) tells of the day when God, as an expression of his own holiness, will cleanse his people and will give a heart of flesh in place of the heart of stone. This will usher in the age of the Spirit and will bring about a new existence, characterized by security and freedom, in which the laws of God are carried out. The supreme feature of this new time is the new spirit within them (Ez 11:19). Joel speaks also of that day when the Spirit of God will be poured out on all flesh (Jl 2:28). Isaiah 65:17 states the promise of “new heavens and a new earth,” words that often reflect national circumstances and hopes (for example, after the exile). However, they came to take on new eschatological significance beyond the hope of the nation Israel.<\/p>\nThe Coming of the New<\/p>\nThe central proclamation of the presence of the kingdom in the world through Jesus is a declaration that the promised new age has broken into time in powerful ways. Jesus’ ministry is one of fulfillment; what has been promised by prophets has begun to take place. John the Baptist had prepared the way for the one who would bestow the promised Spirit. The giving of this Spirit is the giving of new life. Through faith in Christ, one is born anew (Jn 3:3-7). But Jesus had to die in order for this new life to be given. At the Last Supper the cup of wine Jesus shared with his disciples symbolized the blood of the new covenant (Mk 14:24).<\/p>\nThe early church expressed this significance in varying metaphors. This “newness of life” is expressed sacramentally through baptism (Rom 6:4). The eucharistic cup is the new covenant through blood (1 Cor 11:25). An extended discourse on the old and new covenants shows that by the shedding of his blood Christ has become mediator of a new covenant (Heb 9:15); by his blood he has opened up a new and living way into the Holy Place (10:19-20). Paul restates the promise of Ezekiel for a heart of flesh (2 Cor 3:3), after which he gives an account of the ministry of the new covenant in contrast to the old. The church represents the appearance of the new age in the domain of the old.<\/p>\nThe one who comes to Christ by faith is declared a new person, a new creation, for whom the old has passed away (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). Jewish-Gentile hostility disappears in the resulting “new humanity” (Eph 2:15). All other social distinctions (such as male-female, slave-free) pass away in the new humanity created afresh in Christ Jesus (Col 3:10-11).<\/p>\nThe newness of a person in Christ is the foundation for NT ethics (Eph 4:24; Col 3:12). The new commandment (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:8) is not really new (1 Jn 2:7), but now has new possibility and dimension by virtue of the power and pattern of Jesus. Though this new life is a gift of God, the process<\/em> of being made new continues. Transformation by the renewing of the mind (Rom 12:2) brings realization of the will of God. Paul declares the inner man being renewed day by day (2 Cor 4:16).<\/p>\nThe Realization of the New<\/p>\nAs real as the new life of the believer may be, Scripture recognizes a tension between the new age that has come in history but is not yet fully realized. There is a projection to that time when all things are made new (Rv 21:5). With the end of the old, there is a new heaven and new earth. The new Jerusalem (v 2) “descends” as the dwelling place of God. The people of God receive a new name (3:12) as the former things pass away. To the redeemed of the Lord, a new song is given, the song of the Lamb slain from the very foundation of creation: “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!” The antiphonal song returns, “To him who sits upon the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might for ever and ever!” (5:12-13, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Commandment, The New; Covenant, The New; Jerusalem, New; Man, Old and New; New Creation, New Creature; New Heavens and New Earth; Regeneration.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEW<\/h3>\nThat which has just been made or come into existence—often replacing that which already existed, thereby turning the old into new.<\/p>\nThat the second part of the Bible is called the New<\/em> Testament indicates how fundamental the idea of “new” is to biblical revelation. Many key theological expressions incorporate the idea: new creation (2 Cor 5:17), new birth (Jn 3:3), new man (Eph 2:15; Col 3:10), new commandment (Jn 13:34), new covenant (Jer 31:31), new life (Rom 6:4), and various others.<\/p>\nThe Expectation of the New<\/p>\nThe totality of the expectation of the new<\/em> is best expressed in Jeremiah and Ezekiel and in the reference in the Psalter to the “new song” to be given to the people to sing (e.g., Pss 33:3; 40:3; 149:1; cf., also Is 42:10). Jeremiah speaks of the day when God will make a new covenant with the house of Israel (Jer 31:31-34; cf. Ez 34:25-31; 37:26-28). In contrast with the old, this new covenant will be written upon the heart—that is, it will be internalized. Similarly Ezekiel (Ez 36:22-32) tells of the day when God, as an expression of his own holiness, will cleanse his people and will give a heart of flesh in place of the heart of stone. This will usher in the age of the Spirit and will bring about a new existence, characterized by security and freedom, in which the laws of God are carried out. The supreme feature of this new time is the new spirit within them (Ez 11:19). Joel speaks also of that day when the Spirit of God will be poured out on all flesh (Jl 2:28). Isaiah 65:17 states the promise of “new heavens and a new earth,” words that often reflect national circumstances and hopes (for example, after the exile). However, they came to take on new eschatological significance beyond the hope of the nation Israel.<\/p>\nThe Coming of the New<\/p>\nThe central proclamation of the presence of the kingdom in the world through Jesus is a declaration that the promised new age has broken into time in powerful ways. Jesus’ ministry is one of fulfillment; what has been promised by prophets has begun to take place. John the Baptist had prepared the way for the one who would bestow the promised Spirit. The giving of this Spirit is the giving of new life. Through faith in Christ, one is born anew (Jn 3:3-7). But Jesus had to die in order for this new life to be given. At the Last Supper the cup of wine Jesus shared with his disciples symbolized the blood of the new covenant (Mk 14:24).<\/p>\nThe early church expressed this significance in varying metaphors. This “newness of life” is expressed sacramentally through baptism (Rom 6:4). The eucharistic cup is the new covenant through blood (1 Cor 11:25). An extended discourse on the old and new covenants shows that by the shedding of his blood Christ has become mediator of a new covenant (Heb 9:15); by his blood he has opened up a new and living way into the Holy Place (10:19-20). Paul restates the promise of Ezekiel for a heart of flesh (2 Cor 3:3), after which he gives an account of the ministry of the new covenant in contrast to the old. The church represents the appearance of the new age in the domain of the old.<\/p>\nThe one who comes to Christ by faith is declared a new person, a new creation, for whom the old has passed away (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). Jewish-Gentile hostility disappears in the resulting “new humanity” (Eph 2:15). All other social distinctions (such as male-female, slave-free) pass away in the new humanity created afresh in Christ Jesus (Col 3:10-11).<\/p>\nThe newness of a person in Christ is the foundation for NT ethics (Eph 4:24; Col 3:12). The new commandment (Jn 13:34; 1 Jn 2:8) is not really new (1 Jn 2:7), but now has new possibility and dimension by virtue of the power and pattern of Jesus. Though this new life is a gift of God, the process<\/em> of being made new continues. Transformation by the renewing of the mind (Rom 12:2) brings realization of the will of God. Paul declares the inner man being renewed day by day (2 Cor 4:16).<\/p>\nThe Realization of the New<\/p>\nAs real as the new life of the believer may be, Scripture recognizes a tension between the new age that has come in history but is not yet fully realized. There is a projection to that time when all things are made new (Rv 21:5). With the end of the old, there is a new heaven and new earth. The new Jerusalem (v 2) “descends” as the dwelling place of God. The people of God receive a new name (3:12) as the former things pass away. To the redeemed of the Lord, a new song is given, the song of the Lamb slain from the very foundation of creation: “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!” The antiphonal song returns, “To him who sits upon the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might for ever and ever!” (5:12-13, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Commandment, The New; Covenant, The New; Jerusalem, New; Man, Old and New; New Creation, New Creature; New Heavens and New Earth; Regeneration.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEW That which has just been made or come into existence—often replacing that which already existed, thereby turning the old into new. That the second part of the Bible is called the New Testament indicates how fundamental the idea of “new” is to biblical revelation. Many key theological expressions incorporate the idea: new creation (2 Cor 5:17), new birth (Jn 3:3), new man (Eph 2:15; Col 3:10), new commandment (Jn 13:34), new covenant (Jer 31:31), new life (Rom 6:4), and various others. The...","summary_en":"NEW That which has just been made or come into existence—often replacing that which already existed, thereby turning the old into new. That the second part of the Bible is called the New Testament indicates how fundamental the idea of “new” is to biblical revelation. Many key theological expressions incorporate the idea: new creation (2 Cor 5:17), new birth (Jn 3:3), new man (Eph 2:15; Col 3:10), new commandment (Jn 13:34), new covenant (Jer 31:31), new life (Rom 6:4), and various others. The...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27427,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"New Covenant","title_en":"New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>NEW COVENANT<\/h3>\nExpression used by Jesus (Lk 22:20; cf. Jer 31:31) to designate the meaning of his death. See<\/em> Covenant, The New.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEW COVENANT<\/h3>\nExpression used by Jesus (Lk 22:20; cf. Jer 31:31) to designate the meaning of his death. See<\/em> Covenant, The New.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEW COVENANT Expression used by Jesus (Lk 22:20; cf. Jer 31:31) to designate the meaning of his death. See Covenant, The New.","summary_en":"NEW COVENANT Expression used by Jesus (Lk 22:20; cf. Jer 31:31) to designate the meaning of his death. See Covenant, The New.","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":29789,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Perseverance","title_en":"Perseverance","content_ro":"<h3>PERSEVERANCE<\/h3>\nAction or condition of steadfastness. OT Israel waited generations for fulfillment of promises that many believers never lived to see (Heb 11:1, 13, 21-22, 39). The promise to Abraham sustained hope for centuries before Canaan was possessed. The lesson of the wilderness journey, when the waning of initial zeal prevented the people from entering the Promised Land, was never forgotten (3:16-19). Prophets looked constantly beyond failure and tragedy to distant horizons, and they nourished a patient faith (Jer 32:1-15; Hos 3:4-5; Jl 2:28-29; Hb 2:1-3; Dn 12:11-13).<\/p>\nThe NT everywhere urges similar perseverance. Among several Greek expressions, the usual word, proskartereo<\/span>,<\/em> has the root meaning “to attend continually, adhere steadfastly” (Mk 3:9; Acts 8:13; 10:7; Rom 13:6), and is variously translated “devoted,” “continued,” “constant,” “[be] steadfast.”<\/p>\nThis persistent patience is called for in prayer (Lk 18:1-8; Col 4:2); in well doing (Rom 2:7; Gal 6:9); in Christian teaching (Acts 2:42; 2 Tm 3:14); in affliction (2 Thes 1:4); in grace (Acts 13:43; 2 Cor 6:1); in faith (Acts 14:22; Col 1:23); in divine love (Jn 15:9; Jude 1:21); in standing firm (1 Cor 16:13; 2 Thes 2:15); in abiding in Christ (Jn 15:4-10; 1 Jn 2:28); in running with patience (Heb 6:12; 12:1); in not falling away (Heb 3:12; 4:1-10); and in being zealous to confirm our call and election (2 Pt 1:10).<\/p>\nThe failure in perseverance of Judas (Jn 6:71), Demas (2 Tm 4:10), and Hymenaeus (2 Tm 2:17) must be kept in mind, as well as the dread possibility of neglecting so great a salvation (Heb 2:3), being disqualified (1 Cor 9:27), falling while we think we stand (1 Cor 10:12), and committing apostasy (Heb 6:1-8). For, as Jesus said, “He who endures to the end will be saved” (Mt 10:22; 24:13). Such extraordinary emphasis cannot be accidental. The pressures of pagan society, the danger of persecution, emotional reaction after a wonderful initial experience, and the apparent implication of “instant salvation,” made it imperative for Christians to understand that by their endurance they would inherit eternal salvation (Lk 21:19; Rom 5:3; Col 1:11).<\/p>\nYet Scripture never implies that perseverance depends entirely upon human effort. In the OT, the redeeming purpose of God is unswerving; God’s covenant stands, though it needs to be renewed (Jer 31:31-34). Divine love (Hebrew, hesed<\/span>) connotes changeless loyalty; God “will never fail nor forsake” for “his own name’s sake.” The NT assurance is that Christ will raise his own at the last day—none shall pluck them from his hand or the Father’s. Christ will keep us from falling. God is faithful; he works in us to will and work for his good pleasure, and will not allow us to be tempted beyond our strength. Nothing, in heaven or earth, present or future, shall separate us from divine love. We are already sealed by the Holy Spirit as a guarantee of eternal salvation, and we are kept by the power of God unto a salvation yet to be revealed.<\/p>\nThe scriptural tension between exhortation to perseverance and assurance of salvation has given rise to much debate. The intellectual paradox is resolved only in spiritual experience.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Assurance; Backsliding.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PERSEVERANCE<\/h3>\nAction or condition of steadfastness. OT Israel waited generations for fulfillment of promises that many believers never lived to see (Heb 11:1, 13, 21-22, 39). The promise to Abraham sustained hope for centuries before Canaan was possessed. The lesson of the wilderness journey, when the waning of initial zeal prevented the people from entering the Promised Land, was never forgotten (3:16-19). Prophets looked constantly beyond failure and tragedy to distant horizons, and they nourished a patient faith (Jer 32:1-15; Hos 3:4-5; Jl 2:28-29; Hb 2:1-3; Dn 12:11-13).<\/p>\nThe NT everywhere urges similar perseverance. Among several Greek expressions, the usual word, proskartereo<\/span>,<\/em> has the root meaning “to attend continually, adhere steadfastly” (Mk 3:9; Acts 8:13; 10:7; Rom 13:6), and is variously translated “devoted,” “continued,” “constant,” “[be] steadfast.”<\/p>\nThis persistent patience is called for in prayer (Lk 18:1-8; Col 4:2); in well doing (Rom 2:7; Gal 6:9); in Christian teaching (Acts 2:42; 2 Tm 3:14); in affliction (2 Thes 1:4); in grace (Acts 13:43; 2 Cor 6:1); in faith (Acts 14:22; Col 1:23); in divine love (Jn 15:9; Jude 1:21); in standing firm (1 Cor 16:13; 2 Thes 2:15); in abiding in Christ (Jn 15:4-10; 1 Jn 2:28); in running with patience (Heb 6:12; 12:1); in not falling away (Heb 3:12; 4:1-10); and in being zealous to confirm our call and election (2 Pt 1:10).<\/p>\nThe failure in perseverance of Judas (Jn 6:71), Demas (2 Tm 4:10), and Hymenaeus (2 Tm 2:17) must be kept in mind, as well as the dread possibility of neglecting so great a salvation (Heb 2:3), being disqualified (1 Cor 9:27), falling while we think we stand (1 Cor 10:12), and committing apostasy (Heb 6:1-8). For, as Jesus said, “He who endures to the end will be saved” (Mt 10:22; 24:13). Such extraordinary emphasis cannot be accidental. The pressures of pagan society, the danger of persecution, emotional reaction after a wonderful initial experience, and the apparent implication of “instant salvation,” made it imperative for Christians to understand that by their endurance they would inherit eternal salvation (Lk 21:19; Rom 5:3; Col 1:11).<\/p>\nYet Scripture never implies that perseverance depends entirely upon human effort. In the OT, the redeeming purpose of God is unswerving; God’s covenant stands, though it needs to be renewed (Jer 31:31-34). Divine love (Hebrew, hesed<\/span>) connotes changeless loyalty; God “will never fail nor forsake” for “his own name’s sake.” The NT assurance is that Christ will raise his own at the last day—none shall pluck them from his hand or the Father’s. Christ will keep us from falling. God is faithful; he works in us to will and work for his good pleasure, and will not allow us to be tempted beyond our strength. Nothing, in heaven or earth, present or future, shall separate us from divine love. We are already sealed by the Holy Spirit as a guarantee of eternal salvation, and we are kept by the power of God unto a salvation yet to be revealed.<\/p>\nThe scriptural tension between exhortation to perseverance and assurance of salvation has given rise to much debate. The intellectual paradox is resolved only in spiritual experience.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Assurance; Backsliding.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PERSEVERANCE Action or condition of steadfastness. OT Israel waited generations for fulfillment of promises that many believers never lived to see (Heb 11:1, 13, 21-22, 39). The promise to Abraham sustained hope for centuries before Canaan was possessed. The lesson of the wilderness journey, when the waning of initial zeal prevented the people from entering the Promised Land, was never forgotten (3:16-19). Prophets looked constantly beyond failure and tragedy to distant horizons, and they nou...","summary_en":"PERSEVERANCE Action or condition of steadfastness. OT Israel waited generations for fulfillment of promises that many believers never lived to see (Heb 11:1, 13, 21-22, 39). The promise to Abraham sustained hope for centuries before Canaan was possessed. The lesson of the wilderness journey, when the waning of initial zeal prevented the people from entering the Promised Land, was never forgotten (3:16-19). Prophets looked constantly beyond failure and tragedy to distant horizons, and they nou...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31451,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Promise","title_en":"Promise","content_ro":"<h3>PROMISE<\/h3>\nDeclaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified.<\/p>\nTypes of Promise<\/p>\nIn biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who gives them is totally able to perform that which he has promised (Rom 4:21).<\/p>\nDivine promises in Scripture assure their recipients of many spiritual and temporal benefits, including sonship (2 Cor 6:16–7:1), forgiveness of sin (1 Jn 1:9), answer to prayer (Lk 11:9), deliverance from temptations (1 Cor 10:13), sustaining grace for difficult times (2 Cor 12:9), provision for all needs (Phil 4:19), reward for obedience (Jas 1:12), and eternal life (Lk 18:29-30; Jn 3:16; Rom 6:22-23). God’s promises are certain and sure, but participation in their blessing often requires that certain conditions on which they are predicated be met. Divine promises also are not always guarantees of blessing. Indeed, there are promises announcing the certainty of judgment on those who refuse to obey the gospel of the Lord Jesus (2 Thes 1:8-9).<\/p>\nIn addition to the promises of God, which have subjective and individual application to many different people in widely different times and places, there are a great many promises that pertain to the programmatic unfolding of God’s plan of redemption in a grand procession of historical events. These promises have neither repeated applications nor conditional natures. In such cases, promise becomes nearly synonymous with prophecy, and promises of this type, along with their subsequent fulfillment, are intricately intertwined in the entire fabric of redemptive history.<\/p>\nPromises in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe highlights of the promise theme in the OT can be seen in the promise of what is often termed the protevangelium (i.e., the first announcement of the gospel) given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden immediately after the fall into sin (Gn 3:15). Subsequent promises are the covenants God made with Abraham (chs 12; 15; 17) and with David (2 Sm 7), followed by the promise of a new covenant (Jer 31).<\/p>\n<h5>The Protevangelium<\/h5>\nGenesis 3:15b says: “Your [Satan’s] offspring and her [Eve’s] offspring will be enemies. He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel” (nlt<\/span>). This statement is a promise that at some future time the offspring of the woman will crush Satan. The offspring of the woman is individualized in the “he” of the last phrase. “He” shall strike you (i.e., Satan) on the head, although Satan will inflict a wound on the offspring of the woman. Here, then, is the promise that gives Adam and Eve, as well as their descendants, the basis to expect the eventual destruction of their adversary Satan through their offspring.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to Abraham<\/h5>\nIn Genesis 12:1-7 Abraham is told to leave his people and country and to go to a land that the Lord would show to him. God, in turn, promises him that (1) his offspring would become a great nation; (2) he would be blessed and his name made great; (3) through him other nations would be blessed; and (4) the land of Canaan would be given to his descendants. Of particular significance among these promises given to Abraham is that through his offspring he will bless many nations. This promise is repeated five times in the book of Genesis (Gn 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14) and points back to the promise of Genesis 3:15 as well as forward to Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to David<\/h5>\nIn 2 Samuel 7, God gave a promise to King David that his dynasty would endure forever (2 Sm 7:16; Ps 89:34-37). It is with this Davidic covenant that the promised line, which had previously run from Adam through Seth, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Judah, is now narrowed to the royal line of the house of David. David is to be the ancestor of the Messiah-King to come (Ps 89:3, 27-37). David thus became a central figure in the history of God’s plan to redeem the world. Jesus Christ is referred to as the son of David, the son of Abraham (Mt 1:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise of a New Covenant<\/h5>\nIn Jeremiah 31:31-37, it is promised that in future days the Lord would make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. The content of this new covenant reemphasizes and extends the basic promises of the former covenant: “I will be their God, and they will be my people. . . . I will forgive their wickedness and will never again remember their sins” (vv 33-34, nlt<\/span>). It would appear that the “new covenant” of Jeremiah is to be viewed as a restatement of the same basic promises included in the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants.<\/p>\nThe new covenant was inaugurated with the first advent of Christ, and believers in Christ are now recipients by the Holy Spirit of the blessings of that new covenant (Heb 8:6-13). The complete and final realization of these blessings in all their fullness awaits the return of Christ, the complete establishment of his kingdom in its outward and final form, and the blessedness of life in the new heavens and new earth. In the intervening time, God’s people live in a day in which some of the benefits of the age to come are a present reality but the fullness of the new age is yet future.<\/p>\nThe Promise Theme in the New Testament<\/p>\nNew Testament writers refer to the OT promises in a way that indicates that they did not view these promises as separate and isolated assertions but rather as portions of a unitary promise that is ultimately fulfilled in Christ (see Lk 1:54-55, 69-73; Acts 13:23, 32-33; 26:6-7; 2 Cor 1:20). Jesus is the fulfillment of the promises made to the patriarchs and David, and these promises are accordingly to be viewed as having a single focal point in him.<\/p>\nIn the books of Galatians and Ephesians, Paul develops this idea in more detail, saying to the Gentile Christians that they are made “heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Eph 3:6, niv<\/span>). In fact, Paul says that Gentiles who trust in Christ are incorporated into the seed of Abraham and are thus heirs according to the promise (Gal 3:29), and he even goes so far as to equate the gospel with the promise given to Abraham when he states, “The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: ‘All nations will be blessed through you’ ” (Gal 3:8, niv<\/span>). These and other NT texts establish the close connection between the coming of Christ and the fulfillment of the promise. The promises of God find their point of convergence in Christ and all that he accomplished, and will yet accomplish, for his people.<\/p>\nOne further aspect of the promise particularly emphasized in the NT concerns the coming of the Holy Spirit. Paul refers to believers as sealed with the promised Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13), and as receiving the promise of the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The gift of the Holy Spirit is not only the fulfillment of an OT promise (Is 32:15; Ez 36:27; Jl 2:28), and that of Christ himself (Lk 24:49; Jn 14:16, 20; Acts 1:4), but it is also itself a promise of something yet future. Paul speaks of the Holy Spirit’s presence within the believer as a guarantee of our inheritance (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14). The Holy Spirit is the “firstfruit” of future glory (Rom 8:23).<\/p>\nOne final aspect of the promise theme in the NT concerns the assurance of Christ’s second advent and the establishment of the new heavens and the new earth (cf. Jn 14:1-3; 2 Pt 3:4, 9, 13).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Covenant; God, Being and Attributes of; Hope; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROMISE<\/h3>\nDeclaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified.<\/p>\nTypes of Promise<\/p>\nIn biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who gives them is totally able to perform that which he has promised (Rom 4:21).<\/p>\nDivine promises in Scripture assure their recipients of many spiritual and temporal benefits, including sonship (2 Cor 6:16–7:1), forgiveness of sin (1 Jn 1:9), answer to prayer (Lk 11:9), deliverance from temptations (1 Cor 10:13), sustaining grace for difficult times (2 Cor 12:9), provision for all needs (Phil 4:19), reward for obedience (Jas 1:12), and eternal life (Lk 18:29-30; Jn 3:16; Rom 6:22-23). God’s promises are certain and sure, but participation in their blessing often requires that certain conditions on which they are predicated be met. Divine promises also are not always guarantees of blessing. Indeed, there are promises announcing the certainty of judgment on those who refuse to obey the gospel of the Lord Jesus (2 Thes 1:8-9).<\/p>\nIn addition to the promises of God, which have subjective and individual application to many different people in widely different times and places, there are a great many promises that pertain to the programmatic unfolding of God’s plan of redemption in a grand procession of historical events. These promises have neither repeated applications nor conditional natures. In such cases, promise becomes nearly synonymous with prophecy, and promises of this type, along with their subsequent fulfillment, are intricately intertwined in the entire fabric of redemptive history.<\/p>\nPromises in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe highlights of the promise theme in the OT can be seen in the promise of what is often termed the protevangelium (i.e., the first announcement of the gospel) given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden immediately after the fall into sin (Gn 3:15). Subsequent promises are the covenants God made with Abraham (chs 12; 15; 17) and with David (2 Sm 7), followed by the promise of a new covenant (Jer 31).<\/p>\n<h5>The Protevangelium<\/h5>\nGenesis 3:15b says: “Your [Satan’s] offspring and her [Eve’s] offspring will be enemies. He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel” (nlt<\/span>). This statement is a promise that at some future time the offspring of the woman will crush Satan. The offspring of the woman is individualized in the “he” of the last phrase. “He” shall strike you (i.e., Satan) on the head, although Satan will inflict a wound on the offspring of the woman. Here, then, is the promise that gives Adam and Eve, as well as their descendants, the basis to expect the eventual destruction of their adversary Satan through their offspring.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to Abraham<\/h5>\nIn Genesis 12:1-7 Abraham is told to leave his people and country and to go to a land that the Lord would show to him. God, in turn, promises him that (1) his offspring would become a great nation; (2) he would be blessed and his name made great; (3) through him other nations would be blessed; and (4) the land of Canaan would be given to his descendants. Of particular significance among these promises given to Abraham is that through his offspring he will bless many nations. This promise is repeated five times in the book of Genesis (Gn 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14) and points back to the promise of Genesis 3:15 as well as forward to Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to David<\/h5>\nIn 2 Samuel 7, God gave a promise to King David that his dynasty would endure forever (2 Sm 7:16; Ps 89:34-37). It is with this Davidic covenant that the promised line, which had previously run from Adam through Seth, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Judah, is now narrowed to the royal line of the house of David. David is to be the ancestor of the Messiah-King to come (Ps 89:3, 27-37). David thus became a central figure in the history of God’s plan to redeem the world. Jesus Christ is referred to as the son of David, the son of Abraham (Mt 1:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise of a New Covenant<\/h5>\nIn Jeremiah 31:31-37, it is promised that in future days the Lord would make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. The content of this new covenant reemphasizes and extends the basic promises of the former covenant: “I will be their God, and they will be my people. . . . I will forgive their wickedness and will never again remember their sins” (vv 33-34, nlt<\/span>). It would appear that the “new covenant” of Jeremiah is to be viewed as a restatement of the same basic promises included in the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants.<\/p>\nThe new covenant was inaugurated with the first advent of Christ, and believers in Christ are now recipients by the Holy Spirit of the blessings of that new covenant (Heb 8:6-13). The complete and final realization of these blessings in all their fullness awaits the return of Christ, the complete establishment of his kingdom in its outward and final form, and the blessedness of life in the new heavens and new earth. In the intervening time, God’s people live in a day in which some of the benefits of the age to come are a present reality but the fullness of the new age is yet future.<\/p>\nThe Promise Theme in the New Testament<\/p>\nNew Testament writers refer to the OT promises in a way that indicates that they did not view these promises as separate and isolated assertions but rather as portions of a unitary promise that is ultimately fulfilled in Christ (see Lk 1:54-55, 69-73; Acts 13:23, 32-33; 26:6-7; 2 Cor 1:20). Jesus is the fulfillment of the promises made to the patriarchs and David, and these promises are accordingly to be viewed as having a single focal point in him.<\/p>\nIn the books of Galatians and Ephesians, Paul develops this idea in more detail, saying to the Gentile Christians that they are made “heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Eph 3:6, niv<\/span>). In fact, Paul says that Gentiles who trust in Christ are incorporated into the seed of Abraham and are thus heirs according to the promise (Gal 3:29), and he even goes so far as to equate the gospel with the promise given to Abraham when he states, “The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: ‘All nations will be blessed through you’ ” (Gal 3:8, niv<\/span>). These and other NT texts establish the close connection between the coming of Christ and the fulfillment of the promise. The promises of God find their point of convergence in Christ and all that he accomplished, and will yet accomplish, for his people.<\/p>\nOne further aspect of the promise particularly emphasized in the NT concerns the coming of the Holy Spirit. Paul refers to believers as sealed with the promised Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13), and as receiving the promise of the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The gift of the Holy Spirit is not only the fulfillment of an OT promise (Is 32:15; Ez 36:27; Jl 2:28), and that of Christ himself (Lk 24:49; Jn 14:16, 20; Acts 1:4), but it is also itself a promise of something yet future. Paul speaks of the Holy Spirit’s presence within the believer as a guarantee of our inheritance (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14). The Holy Spirit is the “firstfruit” of future glory (Rom 8:23).<\/p>\nOne final aspect of the promise theme in the NT concerns the assurance of Christ’s second advent and the establishment of the new heavens and the new earth (cf. Jn 14:1-3; 2 Pt 3:4, 9, 13).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Covenant; God, Being and Attributes of; Hope; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROMISE Declaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified. Types of Promise In biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who giv...","summary_en":"PROMISE Declaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified. Types of Promise In biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who giv...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36077,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Spirit of God","title_en":"Spirit of God","content_ro":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\nDescription of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach<\/span>;<\/em> Greek, pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament<\/p>\nThere are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\nFirst, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\nSecond, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\nThird, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\nIn the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\nFor Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\nThe problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\nIn exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\nThe later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\nThis tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\nThe other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\nIn the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? BC<\/span>–AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\nThe consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament<\/p>\nIf we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\nThe most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\nJesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\nThe Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\nFor Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\nSince the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\nIt seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\nThis accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\nIn just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\nIt will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\nIn talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\nIt was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\nDescription of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach<\/span>;<\/em> Greek, pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament<\/p>\nThere are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\nFirst, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\nSecond, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\nThird, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\nIn the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\nFor Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\nThe problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\nIn exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\nThe later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\nThis tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\nThe other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\nIn the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? BC<\/span>–AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\nThe consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament<\/p>\nIf we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\nThe most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\nJesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\nThe Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\nFor Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\nSince the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\nIt seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\nThis accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\nIn just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\nIt will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\nIn talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\nIt was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","summary_en":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52530,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:31","content_ro":"31:31<\/strong> The day<\/em> of the new covenant<\/em> was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>","content_en":"31:31<\/strong> The day<\/em> of the new covenant<\/em> was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:31 The day of the new covenant was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).","summary_en":"31:31 The day of the new covenant was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80156,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:31","content_ro":"31:31<\/strong> The day<\/em> of the new covenant<\/em> was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>","content_en":"31:31<\/strong> The day<\/em> of the new covenant<\/em> was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:31 The day of the new covenant was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).","summary_en":"31:31 The day of the new covenant was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107782,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:31","content_ro":"31:31<\/strong> The day<\/em> of the new covenant<\/em> was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>","content_en":"31:31<\/strong> The day<\/em> of the new covenant<\/em> was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:31 The day of the new covenant was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).","summary_en":"31:31 The day of the new covenant was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135408,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:31","content_ro":"31:31<\/strong> The day<\/em> of the new covenant<\/em> was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>","content_en":"31:31<\/strong> The day<\/em> of the new covenant<\/em> was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:31 The day of the new covenant was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).","summary_en":"31:31 The day of the new covenant was realized when Jesus Christ accomplished his redemptive mission on earth (see Heb 8:8-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":59844,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenants","title_en":"God’s Covenants","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\nCovenant<\/em> (Hebrew berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\nThe covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\nGod later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\nThe Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\nGod later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\nYears later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\nCovenant<\/em> (Hebrew berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\nThe covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\nGod later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\nThe Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\nGod later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\nYears later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","summary_en":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61342,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant with David","title_en":"God’s Covenant with David","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\nGod made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nGod’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\nAt the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\nThe complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\nGod made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nGod’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\nAt the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\nThe complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64111,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Broken Covenant","title_en":"The Broken Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","summary_en":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64287,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65314,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\nA central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\nThese dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\nWith the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\nThere is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\nA central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\nThese dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\nWith the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\nThere is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67140,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\nGod had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\nIn the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\nUnder the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\nGod had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\nIn the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\nUnder the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87470,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenants","title_en":"God’s Covenants","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\nCovenant<\/em> (Hebrew berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\nThe covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\nGod later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\nThe Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\nGod later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\nYears later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\nCovenant<\/em> (Hebrew berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\nThe covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\nGod later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\nThe Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\nGod later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\nYears later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","summary_en":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88968,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant with David","title_en":"God’s Covenant with David","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\nGod made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nGod’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\nAt the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\nThe complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\nGod made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nGod’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\nAt the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\nThe complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91737,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Broken Covenant","title_en":"The Broken Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","summary_en":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91913,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92940,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\nA central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\nThese dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\nWith the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\nThere is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\nA central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\nThese dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\nWith the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\nThere is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94766,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\nGod had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\nIn the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\nUnder the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\nGod had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\nIn the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\nUnder the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115096,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenants","title_en":"God’s Covenants","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\nCovenant<\/em> (Hebrew berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\nThe covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\nGod later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\nThe Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\nGod later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\nYears later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\nCovenant<\/em> (Hebrew berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\nThe covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\nGod later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\nThe Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\nGod later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\nYears later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","summary_en":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116594,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant with David","title_en":"God’s Covenant with David","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\nGod made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nGod’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\nAt the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\nThe complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\nGod made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nGod’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\nAt the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\nThe complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119363,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Broken Covenant","title_en":"The Broken Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","summary_en":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119539,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120566,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\nA central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\nThese dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\nWith the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\nThere is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\nA central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\nThese dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\nWith the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\nThere is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122392,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\nGod had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\nIn the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\nUnder the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\nGod had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\nIn the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\nUnder the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":142722,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenants","title_en":"God’s Covenants","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\nCovenant<\/em> (Hebrew berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\nThe covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\nGod later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\nThe Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\nGod later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\nYears later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenants<\/h3>\nCovenant<\/em> (Hebrew berith<\/span>) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible.<\/p>\nThe covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order and gave the rainbow as the sign of this commitment (Gen 9:1-17).<\/p>\nGod later established a covenant relationship with Abraham and his family; the sign of this covenant was circumcision (12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14). God’s covenant with Abraham promised descendants, land, rulers, and the blessing of all nations; these promises formed the basis for the covenants God later made with his people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai was a national covenant (Exod 19–24) whose sign was the Sabbath; it addressed how Israel would be the chosen people of God. This covenant took the form of a suzerain-vassal treaty, an ancient relationship established between a great king and loyal subjects (see study note on Exod 20:1–23:33).<\/p>\nThe Sinai covenant was renewed in Deuteronomy and in Joshua 24:1-28. The renewal focused on God’s promise of land and how Israel would conduct itself while inhabiting the land. Through his covenant with Israel, God affirmed that he was their God and they were his people, a relationship that required their complete loyalty (Jer 11:4; 24:7; Ezek 11:20; 14:11). God, the great king, would bless and protect the nation Israel. Israel’s obligation was to keep God’s commands, decrees, and regulations (Exod 19:5, 8; 24:3, 7; Deut 30:15-20).<\/p>\nGod later formed a covenant with King David (2 Sam 7:5-16), which pertained to the line of kings promised to Abraham and Jacob (Gen 17:6, 16; 35:11).<\/p>\nYears later, at a low point in Israel’s history, the prophet Jeremiah foretold a “new covenant” in Israel’s future (Jer 31:31-33), in which the ideals of the covenants with Abraham and Israel would finally be realized. Jeremiah’s prophecy found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ (see Luke 22:20; Heb 8:6-13; 12:24). This new covenant provides the ultimate fulfillment of the previous promises that were made to God’s people.<\/p>\nGod’s covenants were motivated by God’s faithful love (Hebrew khesed<\/span>), which enabled a relationship to continue between God and his people. God initiated this relationship, announced its conditions, and rewarded his people accordingly. These covenants were not rewards but divine gifts. God may exclude people from the covenant relationship (see Hos 1:9), but he will not break, revoke, or withdraw his covenants. If broken or annulled by the human parties, the covenant could be renewed only through a reapplication of God’s faithful love (Exod 34:6-9; Jer 31:31-33). But while God’s love preserves the relationship, his grace must not be mocked (Isa 54:7-10; 55:3; 61:8; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 6:7).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; 17:9-14; Exod 6:2-5; 19:1–24:18; Lev 26:1-46; Deut 7:7-15; 29:2-29; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-8; 2 Sam 7:5-16; Ezra 10:1-17; Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:31-34; 33:19-26; 34:12-20; Ezek 16:1-63; Luke 22:20; Gal 4:21-31; Eph 2:11-13; Heb 8:6-13; 10:11-18; 12:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","summary_en":"God’s Covenants Covenant (Hebrew berith) means “bond”: A covenant is a binding relationship rooted in a commitment that includes promises and obligations. Whether between individuals (e.g., Gen 21:27), whole nations (e.g., Josh 9:15-18), or God and humans, the covenant relationship calls for faithfulness and makes peace and harmony possible. The covenant theme in the Old Testament begins with Noah, through whom God made a covenant with all of creation. God promised to uphold the created order...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144220,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant with David","title_en":"God’s Covenant with David","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\nGod made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nGod’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\nAt the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\nThe complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\nGod made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nGod’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\nAt the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\nThe complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146989,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Broken Covenant","title_en":"The Broken Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","summary_en":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147165,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148192,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\nA central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\nThese dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\nWith the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\nThere is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\nA central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\nThese dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\nWith the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\nThere is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nJer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150018,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s New Covenant","title_en":"God’s New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\nGod had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\nIn the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\nUnder the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s New Covenant<\/h3>\nGod had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us.<\/p>\nIn the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our Father because he has enabled us to be adopted as his children (2 Cor 1:3; Gal 3:26–4:7). He is the faithful God whose Old Testament promises are fulfilled in the Messiah (2 Cor 1:18-22). And he is the author of reconciliation (5:18-21), as Christ became the means by which God won the sinful world back to himself. Jesus Christ became one with sinful humankind (see 8:9) and released God’s saving power and righteousness to restore the broken relationship between God and the world.<\/p>\nUnder the new covenant, God sends his Spirit to dwell among his people. The Spirit gives believers life, freedom, and the ability to conform to Christ (3:6, 17-18). The Spirit unites us to Christ and serves as the guarantee of our complete salvation in the resurrection (1:22; 5:1-5), when believers’ mortal bodies will be transformed into glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:42-57). Paul gives a full account of this hope in 2 Cor 5:1-10. This will be the final outcome of the new covenant that God has established for his people.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 9:1-17; 12:1-9; 15:1-21; Exod 19:3-6; 2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Chr 10:13-14; Isa 59:20-21; 65:17-25; Jer 2:1–3:10; 31:31-34; Matt 26:27-29; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:23-32; 2 Cor 3:4-18; 4:4-6; Heb 8:6-13; 9:11-28; 10:1-25; 12:18-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","summary_en":"God’s New Covenant God had promised to establish a new covenant with his people (Jer 31:31-34). This new covenant was initiated by Christ (see Luke 22:19-20), who removes the veil associated with the old covenant (2 Cor 3:14). Using the creation story of Genesis 1–2, Paul explains how the God of creation is also the God of the new creation (2 Cor 4:4-6; 5:17). God is now revealed in Christ, who brings God close to us. In the new covenant, God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also our ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"32":[{"id":7896,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covenant, the New","title_en":"Covenant, the New","content_ro":"<h3>COVENANT, The New<\/h3>\nA gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT.<\/p>\nAlthough the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremiah saw God making with Israel “after those days” (vv 32-34) with the covenant God had made with his people in the days of Moses. The contrast is seen, first of all, in the internal nature of the new covenant. Whereas the old covenant was written on tablets of stone (Ex 31:18; 34:27-32; Dt 4:13; 5:22; 9:11; 10:3-4) and in a book (Ex 24:7; cf. the phrase “old written code,” Rom 7:6, rsv<\/span>), the new covenant is to be written on the human heart. One result is a clearer revelation of what God demands; another is the enablement of believers to fulfill those demands (see Rom 8:2-4). The interior nature of the new covenant is spoken of in several other passages (Ez 11:19-21; 36:26-27) and made explicit in the prophet Joel of a time when God “will pour out [his] spirit on all flesh” (Jl 2:28-32).<\/p>\nA second contrast is in the way God’s people know him under the two covenants. There is no doubt that Israel under the old covenant “knew” God; God had revealed himself, though at times the nation tended to forget this (Jgs 2:10; Hos 4:1, 6). What the prophets envisioned in the new covenant is a unique personal knowledge of God by each individual member of the covenant community.<\/p>\nFinally, the two covenants differ in regard to God’s dealing with human sin. Jeremiah promised that God would forgive the iniquity of his people and blot out their sin. Israel already knew that God delighted in mercy and forgiveness (Ex 34:6-7), but Jeremiah was saying that God would never again remember their sin (Jer 31:34). Under the old covenant there was a reminder of sin year after year (Heb 10:3); under the new covenant no remembrance of sin remains (v 14).<\/p>\nA New Covenant<\/p>\nThe expression “new covenant” is found at least six times in the NT (1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:8, 13; 9:15; 12:24; and probably Lk 22:20, according to some manuscripts). In certain Greek manuscripts the phrase is also found in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, where “new” seems to have been added by various scribes to “blood of the covenant,” in order to make these accounts conform to parallel accounts of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians or possibly in Luke.<\/p>\nEven though the term “new” is not found in the accounts in Matthew and Mark in the best Greek manuscripts, and was therefore probably not part of the original text, it is clear from all four accounts that Jesus saw the Lord’s Supper as instituting a different and therefore “new” covenant. The covenant was being sealed by his sacrificial death, that is, by his blood, just as the Mosaic covenant was sealed by the “blood of the covenant” (Ex 24:6-8). The cup of the Lord’s Supper symbolizes the blood of Christ’s sacrifice, sealing the new covenant God has at last made with his people. The new covenant, ratified by Christ’s death, is what the church therefore commemorates each time it celebrates the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\nIn his institution of the Lord’s Supper, Jesus did not elucidate what the “newness” of the covenant entailed. Elsewhere he mentioned a “baptism with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5; 11:16; cf. Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; and Jn 1:33, where this promise is found on the lips of John the Baptist; cf. also 1 Cor 12:13). Yet both OT prophecies refer to the same new covenant that God would establish in the future, as shown in 2 Corinthians 3:6. There the apostle Paul stated that God “has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant” (rsv<\/span>; cf. Jer 31:31), not “in a written code but in the Spirit” (rsv<\/span>; cf. Jl 2:28-32), for “the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life” (rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nSuperiority of the New Covenant<\/p>\nIn 2 Corinthians 3, Paul was showing that in contrast to the old (Mosaic) covenant (v 14), which was a dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone (v 7), the new covenant instituted by Jesus is one of far greater splendor (vv 8-9), written on the human heart by the Spirit of the living God himself (v 3).<\/p>\nThe new covenant concept is treated most exhaustively and systematically in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews 8:8-12 the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the longest OT quotation found in the NT. In Hebrews 12:24 a different Greek word for “new” is used, but the meaning remains the same. The theme of the new covenant dominates the book of Hebrews, which was written to encourage faltering Christians by demonstrating the superiority of the Christian faith over their old Jewish beliefs and practices. In Hebrews the new covenant is seen as better than the old “obsolete” covenant in a number of ways.<\/p>\n1. The new covenant has a better priesthood than the old covenant, since there is no longer any need for a continual change of priests due to death (Heb 7:23). One continual priest now lives forever to make intercession before God on behalf of his people (vv 24-25).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new covenant priest is better than those of the old covenant, since Jesus does not have to offer sacrifices continually for his own sins and then for the sins of his people. He has instead made one complete and perfect offering (7:27; 9:25-28; 10:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new covenant has a better sacrifice than the old covenant; what the blood of bulls and goats could not do, since the atonement they brought could at best be only partial (10:2-3), the blood of Christ has done once for all (9:11-14; 10:1-10).<\/li>\n<li>4. The new covenant is built on “better promises” than the old (8:6).<\/li>\n<li>5. Whereas the old covenant was imperfect (8:7) and thus became obsolete (8:13), the new covenant is perfect and eternal (13:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Whereas the old covenant provided a believer with no direct access to God (9:6-8), the new covenant provides a direct access to God that can purify and perfect the believer’s conscience (cf. 9:14 with 9:9).<\/li>\n<li>7. The new covenant possesses a better “surety,” or guarantee, an oath sworn by God himself (7:20-22).<\/li>\n<li>8. The new covenant assures the presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of each believer. The new covenant community has been touched by the promised Spirit (6:4), who, according to Paul, is both the seal and guarantee of their inheritance (see 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14).<\/li>\nConclusion<\/p>\nThe new covenant and its accompanying new commandment are both fulfillments of what was implicit in the old. The new covenant is written on the heart of each member of the new covenant community by the Holy Spirit. The power of God’s Spirit within, enabling the believer to carry out the new commandment (Rom 8:2-4; Gal 5:16-25), is a distinctive feature of the new covenant.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Covenant.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVENANT, The New<\/h3>\nA gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT.<\/p>\nAlthough the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremiah saw God making with Israel “after those days” (vv 32-34) with the covenant God had made with his people in the days of Moses. The contrast is seen, first of all, in the internal nature of the new covenant. Whereas the old covenant was written on tablets of stone (Ex 31:18; 34:27-32; Dt 4:13; 5:22; 9:11; 10:3-4) and in a book (Ex 24:7; cf. the phrase “old written code,” Rom 7:6, rsv<\/span>), the new covenant is to be written on the human heart. One result is a clearer revelation of what God demands; another is the enablement of believers to fulfill those demands (see Rom 8:2-4). The interior nature of the new covenant is spoken of in several other passages (Ez 11:19-21; 36:26-27) and made explicit in the prophet Joel of a time when God “will pour out [his] spirit on all flesh” (Jl 2:28-32).<\/p>\nA second contrast is in the way God’s people know him under the two covenants. There is no doubt that Israel under the old covenant “knew” God; God had revealed himself, though at times the nation tended to forget this (Jgs 2:10; Hos 4:1, 6). What the prophets envisioned in the new covenant is a unique personal knowledge of God by each individual member of the covenant community.<\/p>\nFinally, the two covenants differ in regard to God’s dealing with human sin. Jeremiah promised that God would forgive the iniquity of his people and blot out their sin. Israel already knew that God delighted in mercy and forgiveness (Ex 34:6-7), but Jeremiah was saying that God would never again remember their sin (Jer 31:34). Under the old covenant there was a reminder of sin year after year (Heb 10:3); under the new covenant no remembrance of sin remains (v 14).<\/p>\nA New Covenant<\/p>\nThe expression “new covenant” is found at least six times in the NT (1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:8, 13; 9:15; 12:24; and probably Lk 22:20, according to some manuscripts). In certain Greek manuscripts the phrase is also found in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, where “new” seems to have been added by various scribes to “blood of the covenant,” in order to make these accounts conform to parallel accounts of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians or possibly in Luke.<\/p>\nEven though the term “new” is not found in the accounts in Matthew and Mark in the best Greek manuscripts, and was therefore probably not part of the original text, it is clear from all four accounts that Jesus saw the Lord’s Supper as instituting a different and therefore “new” covenant. The covenant was being sealed by his sacrificial death, that is, by his blood, just as the Mosaic covenant was sealed by the “blood of the covenant” (Ex 24:6-8). The cup of the Lord’s Supper symbolizes the blood of Christ’s sacrifice, sealing the new covenant God has at last made with his people. The new covenant, ratified by Christ’s death, is what the church therefore commemorates each time it celebrates the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\nIn his institution of the Lord’s Supper, Jesus did not elucidate what the “newness” of the covenant entailed. Elsewhere he mentioned a “baptism with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5; 11:16; cf. Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; and Jn 1:33, where this promise is found on the lips of John the Baptist; cf. also 1 Cor 12:13). Yet both OT prophecies refer to the same new covenant that God would establish in the future, as shown in 2 Corinthians 3:6. There the apostle Paul stated that God “has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant” (rsv<\/span>; cf. Jer 31:31), not “in a written code but in the Spirit” (rsv<\/span>; cf. Jl 2:28-32), for “the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life” (rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nSuperiority of the New Covenant<\/p>\nIn 2 Corinthians 3, Paul was showing that in contrast to the old (Mosaic) covenant (v 14), which was a dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone (v 7), the new covenant instituted by Jesus is one of far greater splendor (vv 8-9), written on the human heart by the Spirit of the living God himself (v 3).<\/p>\nThe new covenant concept is treated most exhaustively and systematically in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews 8:8-12 the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the longest OT quotation found in the NT. In Hebrews 12:24 a different Greek word for “new” is used, but the meaning remains the same. The theme of the new covenant dominates the book of Hebrews, which was written to encourage faltering Christians by demonstrating the superiority of the Christian faith over their old Jewish beliefs and practices. In Hebrews the new covenant is seen as better than the old “obsolete” covenant in a number of ways.<\/p>\n1. The new covenant has a better priesthood than the old covenant, since there is no longer any need for a continual change of priests due to death (Heb 7:23). One continual priest now lives forever to make intercession before God on behalf of his people (vv 24-25).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new covenant priest is better than those of the old covenant, since Jesus does not have to offer sacrifices continually for his own sins and then for the sins of his people. He has instead made one complete and perfect offering (7:27; 9:25-28; 10:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new covenant has a better sacrifice than the old covenant; what the blood of bulls and goats could not do, since the atonement they brought could at best be only partial (10:2-3), the blood of Christ has done once for all (9:11-14; 10:1-10).<\/li>\n<li>4. The new covenant is built on “better promises” than the old (8:6).<\/li>\n<li>5. Whereas the old covenant was imperfect (8:7) and thus became obsolete (8:13), the new covenant is perfect and eternal (13:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Whereas the old covenant provided a believer with no direct access to God (9:6-8), the new covenant provides a direct access to God that can purify and perfect the believer’s conscience (cf. 9:14 with 9:9).<\/li>\n<li>7. The new covenant possesses a better “surety,” or guarantee, an oath sworn by God himself (7:20-22).<\/li>\n<li>8. The new covenant assures the presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of each believer. The new covenant community has been touched by the promised Spirit (6:4), who, according to Paul, is both the seal and guarantee of their inheritance (see 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14).<\/li>\nConclusion<\/p>\nThe new covenant and its accompanying new commandment are both fulfillments of what was implicit in the old. The new covenant is written on the heart of each member of the new covenant community by the Holy Spirit. The power of God’s Spirit within, enabling the believer to carry out the new commandment (Rom 8:2-4; Gal 5:16-25), is a distinctive feature of the new covenant.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Covenant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVENANT, The New A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT. Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremi...","summary_en":"COVENANT, The New A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT. Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremi...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52531,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:32","content_ro":"31:32-34<\/strong> The key difference between the new covenant<\/em> and the one<\/em> God made with their ancestors<\/em> is that the Lord would write<\/em> his instructions deep within<\/em> his people’s hearts<\/em> (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.<\/p>","content_en":"31:32-34<\/strong> The key difference between the new covenant<\/em> and the one<\/em> God made with their ancestors<\/em> is that the Lord would write<\/em> his instructions deep within<\/em> his people’s hearts<\/em> (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:32-34 The key difference between the new covenant and the one God made with their ancestors is that the Lord would write his instructions deep within his people’s hearts (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.","summary_en":"31:32-34 The key difference between the new covenant and the one God made with their ancestors is that the Lord would write his instructions deep within his people’s hearts (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80157,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:32","content_ro":"31:32-34<\/strong> The key difference between the new covenant<\/em> and the one<\/em> God made with their ancestors<\/em> is that the Lord would write<\/em> his instructions deep within<\/em> his people’s hearts<\/em> (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.<\/p>","content_en":"31:32-34<\/strong> The key difference between the new covenant<\/em> and the one<\/em> God made with their ancestors<\/em> is that the Lord would write<\/em> his instructions deep within<\/em> his people’s hearts<\/em> (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:32-34 The key difference between the new covenant and the one God made with their ancestors is that the Lord would write his instructions deep within his people’s hearts (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.","summary_en":"31:32-34 The key difference between the new covenant and the one God made with their ancestors is that the Lord would write his instructions deep within his people’s hearts (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107783,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:32","content_ro":"31:32-34<\/strong> The key difference between the new covenant<\/em> and the one<\/em> God made with their ancestors<\/em> is that the Lord would write<\/em> his instructions deep within<\/em> his people’s hearts<\/em> (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.<\/p>","content_en":"31:32-34<\/strong> The key difference between the new covenant<\/em> and the one<\/em> God made with their ancestors<\/em> is that the Lord would write<\/em> his instructions deep within<\/em> his people’s hearts<\/em> (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:32-34 The key difference between the new covenant and the one God made with their ancestors is that the Lord would write his instructions deep within his people’s hearts (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.","summary_en":"31:32-34 The key difference between the new covenant and the one God made with their ancestors is that the Lord would write his instructions deep within his people’s hearts (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135409,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:32","content_ro":"31:32-34<\/strong> The key difference between the new covenant<\/em> and the one<\/em> God made with their ancestors<\/em> is that the Lord would write<\/em> his instructions deep within<\/em> his people’s hearts<\/em> (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.<\/p>","content_en":"31:32-34<\/strong> The key difference between the new covenant<\/em> and the one<\/em> God made with their ancestors<\/em> is that the Lord would write<\/em> his instructions deep within<\/em> his people’s hearts<\/em> (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:32-34 The key difference between the new covenant and the one God made with their ancestors is that the Lord would write his instructions deep within his people’s hearts (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.","summary_en":"31:32-34 The key difference between the new covenant and the one God made with their ancestors is that the Lord would write his instructions deep within his people’s hearts (see Heb 10:16). The old covenant was external and legal, whereas the new covenant would be a vital, person-to-person relationship. The new covenant would emphasize the redeeming, transforming change of an individual’s spiritual nature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"33":[{"id":15762,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Heart","title_en":"Heart","content_ro":"<h3>HEART<\/h3>\nVital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being.<\/p>\nIn Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew leb<\/span>;<\/em> Greek kardia<\/span>) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great.<\/p>\nPhysical Heart<\/p>\nThat the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see nlt<\/span> mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physical food and wine affect the heart (Jgs 19:5; Ps 104:15; Acts 14:17), and the heart can “faint” and “tremble.” The heart’s position in the body yields an obvious metaphor for “the center” (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\nPyschological Heart<\/p>\nThe heart attends intellectually (e.g., Jer 12:11); it also perceives (Jn 12:40), understands (1 Kgs 3:9), debates (Mk 2:6), reflects (Lk 2:19), remembers (Lk 2:51), thinks (Dt 8:17), imagines (Lk 1:51), is wise (Eccl 1:17, kjv<\/span>), has technical skill (Ex 28:3, kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\nEmotionally, the heart experiences intoxicated merriment (1 Sm 25:36), gladness (Is 30:29), joy (Jn 16:22), sorrow (Neh 2:2), anguish (Rom 9:2), bitterness (Prv 14:10), anxiety (1 Sm 4:13), despair (Eccl 2:20), love (2 Sm 14:1), trust (Ps 112:7), affection (2 Cor 7:3), lust (Mt 5:28), callousness (Mk 3:5), hatred (Lv 19:17), fear (Gn 42:28), jealousy (Jas 3:14), desire (Rom 10:1), discouragement (Nm 32:9), sympathy (Ex 23:9), anger (Dt 19:6, kjv<\/span>), irresolution (2 Chr 13:7, kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\nVolitionally, the heart can purpose (1 Cor 4:5), incline to (1 Sm 14:7), prompt (2 Kgs 12:4; cf. Prv 4:23), be steadfast (Acts 11:23), be willing (Ex 35:22), contrive evil (Acts 5:4), or follow its “treasure” (Mt 6:21).<\/p>\nMorally, the heart can be gentle, lowly (Mt 11:29), holy (1 Thes 3:13), faithful (Neh 9:8), upright (Ps 97:11), pure, single-minded (Jas 4:8), clean (Acts 15:8), loving toward God (Mk 12:30) and others (1 Pt 1:22), hardened, or sensitive (Ez 11:19). Scripture’s emphasis falls upon the heart’s evil (Gn 6:5 and throughout), as self-deceiving (Jas 1:26), deceitful (Jer 17:9), avaricious (Mt 6:19-21), lustful (Mt 5:28), arrogant (Is 9:9), impious (Acts 7:51), perverse (Ps 101:4), and impenitent (Rom 2:5). Nothing defiles a man worse than his own heart (Mk 7:18-19).<\/p>\nYet out of the heart can come good (Lk 6:45; 8:15). Even when frustrated by circumstances or by fear, the heart’s good intention remains good; its evil intent, bad (1 Kgs 8:18; Mt 5:28).<\/p>\nBeing so complex, a person’s heart is sadly divided, and Scripture often extols a perfect, whole, true (i.e., united) heart (Gn 20:5; Ps 86:11; Acts 8:37). The “heart” signifies the total inner self, a person’s hidden core of being (1 Pt 3:4), with which one communes, which one “pours out” in prayer, words, and deeds (Ps 62:8; Mt 15:18-19). It is the genuine self, distinguished from appearance, public position, and physical presence (1 Sm 16:7; 2 Cor 5:12; 1 Thes 2:17). And this “heart-self” has its own nature, character, and disposition (Dn 4:16; 7:4, kjv<\/span>; cf. Mt 12:33-37).<\/p>\nThe Spiritual Heart<\/p>\nThe heart is especially important in biblical religion. The mystery of the hidden self is fully known to God and to Christ (Jer 17:10; Lk 9:47; Rom 8:27), and the heart is the seat of our knowledge of God (2 Cor 4:6). The state of heart governs the vision of God (Mt 5:8); from the heart one speaks to God (Ps 27:8); the heart is the locus of divine indwelling (2 Cor 1:22; Gal 4:6; Eph 3:17).<\/p>\nOn the other hand, moral evil in the heart is seen in biblical perspective as sin against God. Senseless hearts are darkened, often secretly idolatrous, far from God, “not right” before God (Dt 29:18-19; Mt 15:8; Acts 8:21; Rom 1:21). Yet the Lord will not despise a broken, contrite heart (Ps 51:17). When one’s heart is turned toward God, he promises to make it sensitive to divine things, renewed and purified (Dt 4:29; 2 Kgs 23:25; Ps 51:10; Jl 2:13; Ez 36:25-27). God’s law shall then be written on the heart as the inward guide and incentive (Jer 31:33; Heb 8:10; cf. 2 Cor 3:2-3).<\/p>\nIn Christian terms, such transformation involves believing the gospel from the “honest and good heart” that provides fruitful soil for the Word of God (Lk 8:15; Rom 10:9). The true heart draws near to God, loves him with all its intellect, feeling, and will (Lk 10:27; Heb 10:22). Then God gives strength, reward, renewal, grace, peace, and joy to the heart (Ps 73:26; Is 57:15; Acts 2:46; Phil 4:7; Heb 13:9). So the ancient ideal becomes possible again, that of being “a man after God’s own heart” (1 Sm 13:14; Acts 13:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEART<\/h3>\nVital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being.<\/p>\nIn Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew leb<\/span>;<\/em> Greek kardia<\/span>) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great.<\/p>\nPhysical Heart<\/p>\nThat the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see nlt<\/span> mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physical food and wine affect the heart (Jgs 19:5; Ps 104:15; Acts 14:17), and the heart can “faint” and “tremble.” The heart’s position in the body yields an obvious metaphor for “the center” (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\nPyschological Heart<\/p>\nThe heart attends intellectually (e.g., Jer 12:11); it also perceives (Jn 12:40), understands (1 Kgs 3:9), debates (Mk 2:6), reflects (Lk 2:19), remembers (Lk 2:51), thinks (Dt 8:17), imagines (Lk 1:51), is wise (Eccl 1:17, kjv<\/span>), has technical skill (Ex 28:3, kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\nEmotionally, the heart experiences intoxicated merriment (1 Sm 25:36), gladness (Is 30:29), joy (Jn 16:22), sorrow (Neh 2:2), anguish (Rom 9:2), bitterness (Prv 14:10), anxiety (1 Sm 4:13), despair (Eccl 2:20), love (2 Sm 14:1), trust (Ps 112:7), affection (2 Cor 7:3), lust (Mt 5:28), callousness (Mk 3:5), hatred (Lv 19:17), fear (Gn 42:28), jealousy (Jas 3:14), desire (Rom 10:1), discouragement (Nm 32:9), sympathy (Ex 23:9), anger (Dt 19:6, kjv<\/span>), irresolution (2 Chr 13:7, kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\nVolitionally, the heart can purpose (1 Cor 4:5), incline to (1 Sm 14:7), prompt (2 Kgs 12:4; cf. Prv 4:23), be steadfast (Acts 11:23), be willing (Ex 35:22), contrive evil (Acts 5:4), or follow its “treasure” (Mt 6:21).<\/p>\nMorally, the heart can be gentle, lowly (Mt 11:29), holy (1 Thes 3:13), faithful (Neh 9:8), upright (Ps 97:11), pure, single-minded (Jas 4:8), clean (Acts 15:8), loving toward God (Mk 12:30) and others (1 Pt 1:22), hardened, or sensitive (Ez 11:19). Scripture’s emphasis falls upon the heart’s evil (Gn 6:5 and throughout), as self-deceiving (Jas 1:26), deceitful (Jer 17:9), avaricious (Mt 6:19-21), lustful (Mt 5:28), arrogant (Is 9:9), impious (Acts 7:51), perverse (Ps 101:4), and impenitent (Rom 2:5). Nothing defiles a man worse than his own heart (Mk 7:18-19).<\/p>\nYet out of the heart can come good (Lk 6:45; 8:15). Even when frustrated by circumstances or by fear, the heart’s good intention remains good; its evil intent, bad (1 Kgs 8:18; Mt 5:28).<\/p>\nBeing so complex, a person’s heart is sadly divided, and Scripture often extols a perfect, whole, true (i.e., united) heart (Gn 20:5; Ps 86:11; Acts 8:37). The “heart” signifies the total inner self, a person’s hidden core of being (1 Pt 3:4), with which one communes, which one “pours out” in prayer, words, and deeds (Ps 62:8; Mt 15:18-19). It is the genuine self, distinguished from appearance, public position, and physical presence (1 Sm 16:7; 2 Cor 5:12; 1 Thes 2:17). And this “heart-self” has its own nature, character, and disposition (Dn 4:16; 7:4, kjv<\/span>; cf. Mt 12:33-37).<\/p>\nThe Spiritual Heart<\/p>\nThe heart is especially important in biblical religion. The mystery of the hidden self is fully known to God and to Christ (Jer 17:10; Lk 9:47; Rom 8:27), and the heart is the seat of our knowledge of God (2 Cor 4:6). The state of heart governs the vision of God (Mt 5:8); from the heart one speaks to God (Ps 27:8); the heart is the locus of divine indwelling (2 Cor 1:22; Gal 4:6; Eph 3:17).<\/p>\nOn the other hand, moral evil in the heart is seen in biblical perspective as sin against God. Senseless hearts are darkened, often secretly idolatrous, far from God, “not right” before God (Dt 29:18-19; Mt 15:8; Acts 8:21; Rom 1:21). Yet the Lord will not despise a broken, contrite heart (Ps 51:17). When one’s heart is turned toward God, he promises to make it sensitive to divine things, renewed and purified (Dt 4:29; 2 Kgs 23:25; Ps 51:10; Jl 2:13; Ez 36:25-27). God’s law shall then be written on the heart as the inward guide and incentive (Jer 31:33; Heb 8:10; cf. 2 Cor 3:2-3).<\/p>\nIn Christian terms, such transformation involves believing the gospel from the “honest and good heart” that provides fruitful soil for the Word of God (Lk 8:15; Rom 10:9). The true heart draws near to God, loves him with all its intellect, feeling, and will (Lk 10:27; Heb 10:22). Then God gives strength, reward, renewal, grace, peace, and joy to the heart (Ps 73:26; Is 57:15; Acts 2:46; Phil 4:7; Heb 13:9). So the ancient ideal becomes possible again, that of being “a man after God’s own heart” (1 Sm 13:14; Acts 13:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEART Vital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being. In Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew leb; Greek kardia) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great. Physical Heart That the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see nlt mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physi...","summary_en":"HEART Vital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being. In Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew leb; Greek kardia) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great. Physical Heart That the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see nlt mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physi...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19023,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Jeremiah","title_en":"Book of Jeremiah","content_ro":"<h3>JEREMIAH, Book of<\/h3>\n\nOT prophetic book, second in the canonical order of the Prophets.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Authenticity<\/p>\n• The Book of Jeremiah and the Septuagint<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Origin and Destination<\/p>\n• Purpose<\/p>\n• Teaching<\/p>\n• Outline and Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nFew doubt that the prophet from Anathoth wrote the book of Jeremiah, yet questions persist concerning some parts, particularly chapter 52. The use of the third person cannot be used to discredit Jeremiah’s authorship, for Jeremiah used the first and third person, and even the second person, in the same context. For example, 32:6-7 reads: “Jeremiah said [third person], ‘The word of the Lord<\/span> came to me: [first person] . . . your uncle will come to you [second person]’ ” (rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe problem of the passage of time provides the strongest argument against the Jeremian authorship of chapter 52. Jeremiah was born about 657 BC<\/span>. Evil-merodoch released Jehoiachin (52:31) about 95 years later. Jeremiah 52:33 summarizes the continuation of events beyond this time. The problem of location also argues against Jeremian authorship, for Jeremiah took up residence in Egypt (43:6-7) while Jehoiachin dwelt in Babylon. Note also that Jeremiah concludes his writing with chapter 51, making chapter 52 a true editorial appendix. Since chapter 52 parallels 2 Kings 24:18–25:30, it may be that other portions of Jeremiah that parallel sections of 2 Kings may have been written by someone other than Jeremiah.<\/p>\nThe following table shows such portions and includes harmonic passages in 2 Chronicles. The first column shows historical (chronological) sequence. The last column provides a brief condensation of content.<\/p>\nBaruch served as the secretary for Jeremiah. The relationship between the two men apparently lasted many years; the prophet gave a word of encouragement as he blessed his helper (45:5). According to the custom of the people, it would have been legitimate for the scribe to write some of the prophet’s messages in his own words. This would not deny inspiration.<\/p>\nAuthenticity<\/p>\nThat Jeremiah lived and actually wrote the major part of the book bearing his name is authenticated by numerous references in both biblical and nonbiblical sources (e.g., Dn 9; Ecclus 49; Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 10; Talmud: Baba Bathra<\/em>). The veracity of the historical sections of Jeremiah have abundant confirmation in contemporary biblical books and in the secular histories preserved in Babylon, Egypt, and Persia.<\/p>\nHigher critics sought to discredit the portions of Jeremiah that were omitted by the Septuagint, or to credit passages to a later writer because of style differences (e.g., chs 30–33) or spelling differences (as found in chs 27–29) or linguistic problems (as in 10:11, written in Aramaic, but this may be a gloss). Another reason for discrediting Jeremiah’s authorship is that critics dated some prophecies later than indicated in the context. This results from their requiring that predictive writing follow the record of its fulfillment. None of these reasons is sufficient cause for doubting authenticity. The Hebrew text deserves priority over the Septuagint. Aramaic contact with the Jews became commonplace during this period (cf. Ezr 4–7; Dn 2–7) and therefore explains the presence of Aramaic. Different styles may be expected from the same writer due to differing circumstances and differing purposes. Baruch may have been inspired to write parts of this book and\/or edited what Jeremiah wrote. Prediction preceding fulfillment presents no problem for believers.<\/p>\n\nThe Book of Jeremiah and the Septuagint<\/p>\nThe special problems of the Septuagint translation of Jeremiah demand attention. The Septuagint translators evidently made an inaccurate translation. About 2,300 Hebrew words are omitted from the Septuagint. After chapter 23, the mistranslation, omissions, and mixed chronological order indicate confusion. However, the Dead Sea Scrolls display texts with both the Hebrew and the Septuagint order, indicating the antiquity of both editions. Both have suffered corruption at the hands of scribes and the ravages of the ages. The Septuagint evidently veers much further from the original, yet it has invaluable clues to help suggest answers to some textual problems. The most evident major shift in the Septuagint consists of the removal of chapters 46–51 of the Hebrew order, and the placement of them in the spot from which 25:13b-14 was removed. These chapters are renumbered 26–31 but are mixed and changed considerably from the order of the Hebrew Masoretic Text.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThis is fully discussed in the previous entry. See<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1.<\/p>\n\nDate<\/p>\nThe chronological sequence of the messages of Jeremiah constitutes a major problem that cannot be wholly solved. Nonetheless, the book was written during Jeremiah’s ministry (c. 627–586 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nOrigin and Destination<\/p>\nAfter beginning his ministry in Anathoth, Jeremiah moved to Jerusalem, where he remained until he was forced to join the disobedient refugees who arrived in Egypt about 584 BC<\/span>. Until the deportation of Jehoiachin (597 BC<\/span>), Jeremiah addressed his messages to the king and the people residing in Judah. Later messages addressed the same group, plus the captives in Babylon (e.g., ch 29). After the departure to Egypt, he addressed Jews in that land.<\/p>\nPurpose<\/p>\nPart of God’s commission to Jeremiah stated the purpose of Jeremiah’s ministry: “Today I appoint you to stand up against nations and kingdoms. You are to uproot some and tear them down, to destroy and overthrow them. You are to build others up and plant them” (1:10, nlt<\/span>). The first four parts of the commission required that Jeremiah, appointed as a “chief governor” over nations, should wreck the existing religious and social structures by his preaching against moral and spiritual sin. Doubtless, the physical destruction caused by the Egyptians, Assyrians, and Babylonians was the accoutrement for the truth uttered by the prophet. Jeremiah is consistent in his blasts at moral and religious wickedness, his call to submit to the punishment that God gives through Babylon, and his assurance that such submission will lead to blessing. When Zedekiah asks advice (38:14), we know what Jeremiah will say. When the captains of the refugees ask if they should go to Egypt, we already know the answer (42:3). We may also anticipate the obdurate rejection of God’s message on the part of the inquiring people, who apparently want to know God’s will but have no desire to obey it.<\/p>\nNevertheless, part of Jeremiah’s purpose focuses on the most distant future when the new covenant will supplant the old (31:31-37), and a transformed people bent on obedience rather than sin will receive God’s promised kingdom.<\/p>\nTeaching<\/p>\nNational sin brings national punishment. No truth blazes so clearly as this. Gentiles as well as Jews stand under the same judgment, for God is not the God of Israel only.<\/p>\nIndividuals are not overlooked in divine judgments on nations. God sets before each the way of life and the way of death (21:8) and appeals to each to choose life (27:13).<\/p>\nJeremiah illustrates human depravity by questioning if people can change their skin color or leopards their spots (13:23). The depths of depravity reach beyond man’s ability to measure (17:9-10). People even love falsehood (5:30-31). Yet God promises to transform willing subjects who call on him (33:3) by giving them a “new heart” (24:7; 32:38-41) as the climatic provision of the new covenant (31:33-35). The Messiah, who accomplishes the saving work, is called the Lord our Righteousness, the King, the righteous Branch, the Branch of David (23:5-6; 33:15-16).<\/p>\nA future nation will be made up of individuals who accept this salvation. Passing through the night of tribulation as of travail (30:6-7), the Jews will understand the true identity of their Messiah, will believe and receive him with repentant sorrow, will be cleansed (33:8), and will be regathered from all countries (32:37) by the omnipotent God (v 27).<\/p>\nOutline and Content<\/p>\nThough many see no logical order, a careful reading of Jeremiah will reveal a grouping on the basis of content, as suggested by the following outline:<\/p>\n<li> I. Introduction (1)<\/li>\n<li> II. Oracles against the Jews (2–25)<\/li>\n<li>III. History—Signs and Sufferings of Jeremiah before the Siege (26–29)<\/li>\n<li> IV. The Book of Hope written during the Siege (30–33)<\/li>\n<li> V. History—Signs and Sufferings of Jeremiah after the Siege (34–45)<\/li>\n<li> VI. Oracles against the Nations (46–51)<\/li>\n<li>VII. Conclusion (52)<\/li>\nThe prophet opens his ministry with a series of utterances against the sins of Jerusalem (2:1–3:5), followed by similar messages (through ch 4), concluding with words of judgment (chs 5–6). The message in the temple gate (chs 7–10) leads into the proclamation against covenant breakers (chs 11–13). The lamentation over the drought (ch 14) and subsequent miseries (ch 15) compares with many similar expressions of grief. Jeremiah did not differ from other prophets in his use of object lessons. The rotted linen waistband (ch 13), the broken jug (ch 19), figs (ch 24), and ox yoke (chs 27–28) may be supplemented by human object lessons (ch 35), and even the prophet himself, whose celibacy (16:1-4), resistance to sympathetic consolation (16:5-7), and withdrawal from feasts (16:8-9) all served to illustrate and confirm his message.<\/p>\nPlaces where Jeremiah proclaimed his messages helped bear home his point. He stood in the public gate, where kings came and went, to proclaim that judgment (fire) would come through the gate (17:19, 27; 39:3). Then he went to the potter’s house (ch 18), and then to Hinnom or Topath, which would be called the Valley of Slaughter (ch 19).<\/p>\nThe persecution suffered by Jeremiah first hinted at (1:8), then predicted (v 19), expresses its venom privately from his home village (11:19-23). The prophet’s kindred join the opposition (12:6). Public opposition brings beatings and the stocks (20:2-3). Jeremiah prefers to keep silent rather than to speak and suffer (v 9), but he cannot withhold the word that is as fire in his bones. The result: all his familiars reproached, derided, terrorized, and denounced him, then sought his death (vv 7-18). Jeremiah escaped death at the hands of priests, prophets, and people only because he had a few faithful friends (26:8-24). When his prophecies began to materialize, hatred mounted. He was beaten and put into a dungeon for many days (37:14-17) on a false charge. Temporary relief at the guardhouse (v 21) lasted only a few days. Officials clamored again for his death (38:4) and put him into a cistern, where he sank in the mire (v 6). His rescue (v 10) preserved his life, but his imprisonment at the guardhouse continued (v 28). His writings were cut up and burned (36:23); his words were denied and rejected (43:1-7; 44:16).<\/p>\nThe “Book of Hope“ (chs 30–33) does contain some words of judgment (32:28-35), and other sections of the prophecy have a few bright spots (3:11-18; 16:14-16; 23:2-8; 29:10-14), but in a volume otherwise dark, these four chapters bring pleasant relief. The climax of hope, as indicated also in the longest NT quotation from Jeremiah (see Heb 8:8-12), predicts a new covenant (31:31-40). Other prophecies also describe the end of the Mosaic law and sacrament (e.g., 3:16), and the new covenant (32:40; 33:19-26).<\/p>\nLittle is known of Jeremiah’s activity or messages from c. 594–589 BC<\/span>. Zedekiah’s counselors made clandestine plans for throwing off Babylon’s yoke by alliances with neighbor nations. A traitor may have reported the conspiracy to Babylon (perhaps Edom). After Babylon attacked, Zedekiah sought a hopeful report from Jeremiah but did not get it.<\/p>\nThe Recabite faithfulness to the Nazarite vow (ch 35) dates to the days of Jehoiakim but as an object lesson fits the siege context. Recabites received a human command that they obeyed; Jews received a divine command that they rejected. Recabites will be blessed (35:18-19); Judah, judged (vv 15-17). The reading of the scroll to Jehoiakim and his scornful rejection of it (ch 36) illustrates the prophetic assertion (35:15) that destruction follows the rejection of God’s message given through the prophets.<\/p>\nThe siege comes into focus in chapter 37 with another inquiry from Zedekiah (the nonchronological chs 35–36 serve as an illustrative parenthesis). Jeremiah 37:11 moves forward to the time of the lifting of the siege of 589 BC<\/span> when Nebuchadnezzar drove Pharaoh Hophra’s army back to Egypt. During the reprieve, Jeremiah sought to attend a meeting of relatives to settle family matters at or near Anathoth. Perhaps the trip involved initiating the purchase that would be made two years later (32:6-15). However, as he was leaving the city, he was arrested for desertion to the Babylonians and jailed in a dungeon cell until Zedekiah granted him privileged prisoner status.<\/p>\nThe king’s officers had ample cause for the accusation of sedition: Jeremiah had encouraged desertion (21:9; 38:2). Traitors deserved death, and this was their verdict against Jeremiah (38:4-5). The violence of the time encouraged the officers to select a cruel method of execution: let Jeremiah starve and bury himself in the mire at the bottom of an abandoned cistern. A sympathetic Ethiopian, Ebed-melech, made the rescue. Immediately, the unadulterated prophecies of judgment came forth again from Jeremiah’s lips, including a message to the king that reflected Jeremiah’s own recent experience: “[Your friends] have betrayed and misled you. When your feet sank in the mud, they left you to your fate” (38:22, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nJeremiah 39:1–43:7 records history from the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span> to the flight into Egypt, including the liberation of Jeremiah (ch 39), appointment and assassination of Gedaliah (chs 40–41), a warning from God against going to Egypt (ch 42), and the obdurate disobedience of the people (43:1-7).<\/p>\nThe latest writings of Jeremiah are found in chapter 44. The audience consisted of idolatrous Jews (44:4-6) gathered from various parts of Egypt as far as Aswan (Pathros). Jeremiah repeated the appeal of former prophets to reject false gods in favor of Jehovah, but to no avail (44:15-16).<\/p>\nThe message to Baruch (ch 45), written about 605 BC<\/span>, is placed here to round out the main part of the book, which begins with the commission to “break down” and “pluck up” (1:10) and concludes with the same Hebrew words (45:4). If Baruch had ambition to obtain status in the Judean court like his brother Seraiah (51:59), he was advised that it would be useless because disaster would come, as the preceding chapters indicate.<\/p>\nThe oracles against the nations (46–51), introduced by a title superscription (46:1), constitute a distinct stylistic division similar to Isaiah 13–23, Ezekiel 25–32, and Amos 1:3–2:16.<\/p>\nSome of the prophecies against foreign nations in Jeremiah carry dates that show that they were written at different points during his ministry but were collected together for the book.<\/p>\nThe prophecy against Egypt opens with a colorful description of Egypt’s expulsion from Carchemish (605 BC<\/span>) after a short occupancy (Jer 46:1-12). The second message (vv 13-26) may picture the attack on Egypt in 601 BC<\/span> when Neco stopped Nebuchadnezzar at the border; the attack in 589 BC<\/span> when Hophra lost in his attempt to aid Zedekiah; or (most probably) the invasion of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar in 568 BC<\/span>, when Babylon took advantage of the weakness of Egypt to occupy it. At that time Nebuchadnezzar set up his judgment throne as predicted (43:10) and meted out death sentences to all rebels, including those Jews who might have been implicated in anti-Babylonian conspiracies. The conclusion of the Egypt oracle repeats part of the Book of Hope (46:27-28, cf. 30:10-11).<\/p>\nMessages against Edom, Arabia, Phoenician cities, and Ammon generally condemn pride, cruelty, and idolatry. The oracle against Elam is unique. No other prophet speaks judgment against this people, whose dwelling east of Babylon meant rare contact with Judah. Jeremiah predicted that Elam would be doomed, then restored. Ezekiel counts Elamites among the inhabitants of Sheol (Ez 32:24).<\/p>\nThe final judgment indicates the unbiased attitude of the prophet. His messages placed him in an advantageous position with the Babylonians, who treated him with respect and kindness, in contrast to their cruelty to other Jews. But when God spoke against Babylon, Jeremiah uttered God’s words without respect to his own comfort, just as he had spoken against Egypt when silence would have been logical for self-preservation.<\/p>\nChapter 51 concludes “the words of Jeremiah.”<\/p>\nChapter 52 repeats historical facts previously stated prophetically by Jeremiah, and partially recorded also as history in chapter 39 (cf. 2 Kgs 25 and 2 Chr 36). The editor of Jeremiah evidently desired to climax the book with a historical confirmation of Jeremiah’s prophecy, but he included facts beyond those contained elsewhere.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Jeremiah (Person) #1; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JEREMIAH, Book of<\/h3>\n\nOT prophetic book, second in the canonical order of the Prophets.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Authenticity<\/p>\n• The Book of Jeremiah and the Septuagint<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Origin and Destination<\/p>\n• Purpose<\/p>\n• Teaching<\/p>\n• Outline and Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nFew doubt that the prophet from Anathoth wrote the book of Jeremiah, yet questions persist concerning some parts, particularly chapter 52. The use of the third person cannot be used to discredit Jeremiah’s authorship, for Jeremiah used the first and third person, and even the second person, in the same context. For example, 32:6-7 reads: “Jeremiah said [third person], ‘The word of the Lord<\/span> came to me: [first person] . . . your uncle will come to you [second person]’ ” (rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe problem of the passage of time provides the strongest argument against the Jeremian authorship of chapter 52. Jeremiah was born about 657 BC<\/span>. Evil-merodoch released Jehoiachin (52:31) about 95 years later. Jeremiah 52:33 summarizes the continuation of events beyond this time. The problem of location also argues against Jeremian authorship, for Jeremiah took up residence in Egypt (43:6-7) while Jehoiachin dwelt in Babylon. Note also that Jeremiah concludes his writing with chapter 51, making chapter 52 a true editorial appendix. Since chapter 52 parallels 2 Kings 24:18–25:30, it may be that other portions of Jeremiah that parallel sections of 2 Kings may have been written by someone other than Jeremiah.<\/p>\nThe following table shows such portions and includes harmonic passages in 2 Chronicles. The first column shows historical (chronological) sequence. The last column provides a brief condensation of content.<\/p>\nBaruch served as the secretary for Jeremiah. The relationship between the two men apparently lasted many years; the prophet gave a word of encouragement as he blessed his helper (45:5). According to the custom of the people, it would have been legitimate for the scribe to write some of the prophet’s messages in his own words. This would not deny inspiration.<\/p>\nAuthenticity<\/p>\nThat Jeremiah lived and actually wrote the major part of the book bearing his name is authenticated by numerous references in both biblical and nonbiblical sources (e.g., Dn 9; Ecclus 49; Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 10; Talmud: Baba Bathra<\/em>). The veracity of the historical sections of Jeremiah have abundant confirmation in contemporary biblical books and in the secular histories preserved in Babylon, Egypt, and Persia.<\/p>\nHigher critics sought to discredit the portions of Jeremiah that were omitted by the Septuagint, or to credit passages to a later writer because of style differences (e.g., chs 30–33) or spelling differences (as found in chs 27–29) or linguistic problems (as in 10:11, written in Aramaic, but this may be a gloss). Another reason for discrediting Jeremiah’s authorship is that critics dated some prophecies later than indicated in the context. This results from their requiring that predictive writing follow the record of its fulfillment. None of these reasons is sufficient cause for doubting authenticity. The Hebrew text deserves priority over the Septuagint. Aramaic contact with the Jews became commonplace during this period (cf. Ezr 4–7; Dn 2–7) and therefore explains the presence of Aramaic. Different styles may be expected from the same writer due to differing circumstances and differing purposes. Baruch may have been inspired to write parts of this book and\/or edited what Jeremiah wrote. Prediction preceding fulfillment presents no problem for believers.<\/p>\n\nThe Book of Jeremiah and the Septuagint<\/p>\nThe special problems of the Septuagint translation of Jeremiah demand attention. The Septuagint translators evidently made an inaccurate translation. About 2,300 Hebrew words are omitted from the Septuagint. After chapter 23, the mistranslation, omissions, and mixed chronological order indicate confusion. However, the Dead Sea Scrolls display texts with both the Hebrew and the Septuagint order, indicating the antiquity of both editions. Both have suffered corruption at the hands of scribes and the ravages of the ages. The Septuagint evidently veers much further from the original, yet it has invaluable clues to help suggest answers to some textual problems. The most evident major shift in the Septuagint consists of the removal of chapters 46–51 of the Hebrew order, and the placement of them in the spot from which 25:13b-14 was removed. These chapters are renumbered 26–31 but are mixed and changed considerably from the order of the Hebrew Masoretic Text.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nThis is fully discussed in the previous entry. See<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1.<\/p>\n\nDate<\/p>\nThe chronological sequence of the messages of Jeremiah constitutes a major problem that cannot be wholly solved. Nonetheless, the book was written during Jeremiah’s ministry (c. 627–586 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nOrigin and Destination<\/p>\nAfter beginning his ministry in Anathoth, Jeremiah moved to Jerusalem, where he remained until he was forced to join the disobedient refugees who arrived in Egypt about 584 BC<\/span>. Until the deportation of Jehoiachin (597 BC<\/span>), Jeremiah addressed his messages to the king and the people residing in Judah. Later messages addressed the same group, plus the captives in Babylon (e.g., ch 29). After the departure to Egypt, he addressed Jews in that land.<\/p>\nPurpose<\/p>\nPart of God’s commission to Jeremiah stated the purpose of Jeremiah’s ministry: “Today I appoint you to stand up against nations and kingdoms. You are to uproot some and tear them down, to destroy and overthrow them. You are to build others up and plant them” (1:10, nlt<\/span>). The first four parts of the commission required that Jeremiah, appointed as a “chief governor” over nations, should wreck the existing religious and social structures by his preaching against moral and spiritual sin. Doubtless, the physical destruction caused by the Egyptians, Assyrians, and Babylonians was the accoutrement for the truth uttered by the prophet. Jeremiah is consistent in his blasts at moral and religious wickedness, his call to submit to the punishment that God gives through Babylon, and his assurance that such submission will lead to blessing. When Zedekiah asks advice (38:14), we know what Jeremiah will say. When the captains of the refugees ask if they should go to Egypt, we already know the answer (42:3). We may also anticipate the obdurate rejection of God’s message on the part of the inquiring people, who apparently want to know God’s will but have no desire to obey it.<\/p>\nNevertheless, part of Jeremiah’s purpose focuses on the most distant future when the new covenant will supplant the old (31:31-37), and a transformed people bent on obedience rather than sin will receive God’s promised kingdom.<\/p>\nTeaching<\/p>\nNational sin brings national punishment. No truth blazes so clearly as this. Gentiles as well as Jews stand under the same judgment, for God is not the God of Israel only.<\/p>\nIndividuals are not overlooked in divine judgments on nations. God sets before each the way of life and the way of death (21:8) and appeals to each to choose life (27:13).<\/p>\nJeremiah illustrates human depravity by questioning if people can change their skin color or leopards their spots (13:23). The depths of depravity reach beyond man’s ability to measure (17:9-10). People even love falsehood (5:30-31). Yet God promises to transform willing subjects who call on him (33:3) by giving them a “new heart” (24:7; 32:38-41) as the climatic provision of the new covenant (31:33-35). The Messiah, who accomplishes the saving work, is called the Lord our Righteousness, the King, the righteous Branch, the Branch of David (23:5-6; 33:15-16).<\/p>\nA future nation will be made up of individuals who accept this salvation. Passing through the night of tribulation as of travail (30:6-7), the Jews will understand the true identity of their Messiah, will believe and receive him with repentant sorrow, will be cleansed (33:8), and will be regathered from all countries (32:37) by the omnipotent God (v 27).<\/p>\nOutline and Content<\/p>\nThough many see no logical order, a careful reading of Jeremiah will reveal a grouping on the basis of content, as suggested by the following outline:<\/p>\n<li> I. Introduction (1)<\/li>\n<li> II. Oracles against the Jews (2–25)<\/li>\n<li>III. History—Signs and Sufferings of Jeremiah before the Siege (26–29)<\/li>\n<li> IV. The Book of Hope written during the Siege (30–33)<\/li>\n<li> V. History—Signs and Sufferings of Jeremiah after the Siege (34–45)<\/li>\n<li> VI. Oracles against the Nations (46–51)<\/li>\n<li>VII. Conclusion (52)<\/li>\nThe prophet opens his ministry with a series of utterances against the sins of Jerusalem (2:1–3:5), followed by similar messages (through ch 4), concluding with words of judgment (chs 5–6). The message in the temple gate (chs 7–10) leads into the proclamation against covenant breakers (chs 11–13). The lamentation over the drought (ch 14) and subsequent miseries (ch 15) compares with many similar expressions of grief. Jeremiah did not differ from other prophets in his use of object lessons. The rotted linen waistband (ch 13), the broken jug (ch 19), figs (ch 24), and ox yoke (chs 27–28) may be supplemented by human object lessons (ch 35), and even the prophet himself, whose celibacy (16:1-4), resistance to sympathetic consolation (16:5-7), and withdrawal from feasts (16:8-9) all served to illustrate and confirm his message.<\/p>\nPlaces where Jeremiah proclaimed his messages helped bear home his point. He stood in the public gate, where kings came and went, to proclaim that judgment (fire) would come through the gate (17:19, 27; 39:3). Then he went to the potter’s house (ch 18), and then to Hinnom or Topath, which would be called the Valley of Slaughter (ch 19).<\/p>\nThe persecution suffered by Jeremiah first hinted at (1:8), then predicted (v 19), expresses its venom privately from his home village (11:19-23). The prophet’s kindred join the opposition (12:6). Public opposition brings beatings and the stocks (20:2-3). Jeremiah prefers to keep silent rather than to speak and suffer (v 9), but he cannot withhold the word that is as fire in his bones. The result: all his familiars reproached, derided, terrorized, and denounced him, then sought his death (vv 7-18). Jeremiah escaped death at the hands of priests, prophets, and people only because he had a few faithful friends (26:8-24). When his prophecies began to materialize, hatred mounted. He was beaten and put into a dungeon for many days (37:14-17) on a false charge. Temporary relief at the guardhouse (v 21) lasted only a few days. Officials clamored again for his death (38:4) and put him into a cistern, where he sank in the mire (v 6). His rescue (v 10) preserved his life, but his imprisonment at the guardhouse continued (v 28). His writings were cut up and burned (36:23); his words were denied and rejected (43:1-7; 44:16).<\/p>\nThe “Book of Hope“ (chs 30–33) does contain some words of judgment (32:28-35), and other sections of the prophecy have a few bright spots (3:11-18; 16:14-16; 23:2-8; 29:10-14), but in a volume otherwise dark, these four chapters bring pleasant relief. The climax of hope, as indicated also in the longest NT quotation from Jeremiah (see Heb 8:8-12), predicts a new covenant (31:31-40). Other prophecies also describe the end of the Mosaic law and sacrament (e.g., 3:16), and the new covenant (32:40; 33:19-26).<\/p>\nLittle is known of Jeremiah’s activity or messages from c. 594–589 BC<\/span>. Zedekiah’s counselors made clandestine plans for throwing off Babylon’s yoke by alliances with neighbor nations. A traitor may have reported the conspiracy to Babylon (perhaps Edom). After Babylon attacked, Zedekiah sought a hopeful report from Jeremiah but did not get it.<\/p>\nThe Recabite faithfulness to the Nazarite vow (ch 35) dates to the days of Jehoiakim but as an object lesson fits the siege context. Recabites received a human command that they obeyed; Jews received a divine command that they rejected. Recabites will be blessed (35:18-19); Judah, judged (vv 15-17). The reading of the scroll to Jehoiakim and his scornful rejection of it (ch 36) illustrates the prophetic assertion (35:15) that destruction follows the rejection of God’s message given through the prophets.<\/p>\nThe siege comes into focus in chapter 37 with another inquiry from Zedekiah (the nonchronological chs 35–36 serve as an illustrative parenthesis). Jeremiah 37:11 moves forward to the time of the lifting of the siege of 589 BC<\/span> when Nebuchadnezzar drove Pharaoh Hophra’s army back to Egypt. During the reprieve, Jeremiah sought to attend a meeting of relatives to settle family matters at or near Anathoth. Perhaps the trip involved initiating the purchase that would be made two years later (32:6-15). However, as he was leaving the city, he was arrested for desertion to the Babylonians and jailed in a dungeon cell until Zedekiah granted him privileged prisoner status.<\/p>\nThe king’s officers had ample cause for the accusation of sedition: Jeremiah had encouraged desertion (21:9; 38:2). Traitors deserved death, and this was their verdict against Jeremiah (38:4-5). The violence of the time encouraged the officers to select a cruel method of execution: let Jeremiah starve and bury himself in the mire at the bottom of an abandoned cistern. A sympathetic Ethiopian, Ebed-melech, made the rescue. Immediately, the unadulterated prophecies of judgment came forth again from Jeremiah’s lips, including a message to the king that reflected Jeremiah’s own recent experience: “[Your friends] have betrayed and misled you. When your feet sank in the mud, they left you to your fate” (38:22, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nJeremiah 39:1–43:7 records history from the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span> to the flight into Egypt, including the liberation of Jeremiah (ch 39), appointment and assassination of Gedaliah (chs 40–41), a warning from God against going to Egypt (ch 42), and the obdurate disobedience of the people (43:1-7).<\/p>\nThe latest writings of Jeremiah are found in chapter 44. The audience consisted of idolatrous Jews (44:4-6) gathered from various parts of Egypt as far as Aswan (Pathros). Jeremiah repeated the appeal of former prophets to reject false gods in favor of Jehovah, but to no avail (44:15-16).<\/p>\nThe message to Baruch (ch 45), written about 605 BC<\/span>, is placed here to round out the main part of the book, which begins with the commission to “break down” and “pluck up” (1:10) and concludes with the same Hebrew words (45:4). If Baruch had ambition to obtain status in the Judean court like his brother Seraiah (51:59), he was advised that it would be useless because disaster would come, as the preceding chapters indicate.<\/p>\nThe oracles against the nations (46–51), introduced by a title superscription (46:1), constitute a distinct stylistic division similar to Isaiah 13–23, Ezekiel 25–32, and Amos 1:3–2:16.<\/p>\nSome of the prophecies against foreign nations in Jeremiah carry dates that show that they were written at different points during his ministry but were collected together for the book.<\/p>\nThe prophecy against Egypt opens with a colorful description of Egypt’s expulsion from Carchemish (605 BC<\/span>) after a short occupancy (Jer 46:1-12). The second message (vv 13-26) may picture the attack on Egypt in 601 BC<\/span> when Neco stopped Nebuchadnezzar at the border; the attack in 589 BC<\/span> when Hophra lost in his attempt to aid Zedekiah; or (most probably) the invasion of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar in 568 BC<\/span>, when Babylon took advantage of the weakness of Egypt to occupy it. At that time Nebuchadnezzar set up his judgment throne as predicted (43:10) and meted out death sentences to all rebels, including those Jews who might have been implicated in anti-Babylonian conspiracies. The conclusion of the Egypt oracle repeats part of the Book of Hope (46:27-28, cf. 30:10-11).<\/p>\nMessages against Edom, Arabia, Phoenician cities, and Ammon generally condemn pride, cruelty, and idolatry. The oracle against Elam is unique. No other prophet speaks judgment against this people, whose dwelling east of Babylon meant rare contact with Judah. Jeremiah predicted that Elam would be doomed, then restored. Ezekiel counts Elamites among the inhabitants of Sheol (Ez 32:24).<\/p>\nThe final judgment indicates the unbiased attitude of the prophet. His messages placed him in an advantageous position with the Babylonians, who treated him with respect and kindness, in contrast to their cruelty to other Jews. But when God spoke against Babylon, Jeremiah uttered God’s words without respect to his own comfort, just as he had spoken against Egypt when silence would have been logical for self-preservation.<\/p>\nChapter 51 concludes “the words of Jeremiah.”<\/p>\nChapter 52 repeats historical facts previously stated prophetically by Jeremiah, and partially recorded also as history in chapter 39 (cf. 2 Kgs 25 and 2 Chr 36). The editor of Jeremiah evidently desired to climax the book with a historical confirmation of Jeremiah’s prophecy, but he included facts beyond those contained elsewhere.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Israel, History of; Jeremiah (Person) #1; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JEREMIAH, Book of OT prophetic book, second in the canonical order of the Prophets. Preview • Author • Authenticity • The Book of Jeremiah and the Septuagint • Background • Date • Origin and Destination • Purpose • Teaching • Outline and Content Author Few doubt that the prophet from Anathoth wrote the book of Jeremiah, yet questions persist concerning some parts, particularly chapter 52. The use of the third person cannot be used to discredit Jeremiah’s authorship, for Jeremiah used the firs...","summary_en":"JEREMIAH, Book of OT prophetic book, second in the canonical order of the Prophets. Preview • Author • Authenticity • The Book of Jeremiah and the Septuagint • Background • Date • Origin and Destination • Purpose • Teaching • Outline and Content Author Few doubt that the prophet from Anathoth wrote the book of Jeremiah, yet questions persist concerning some parts, particularly chapter 52. The use of the third person cannot be used to discredit Jeremiah’s authorship, for Jeremiah used the firs...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22827,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Biblical Concept of Law","title_en":"Biblical Concept of Law","content_ro":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\nGod’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Historical Context<\/p>\n• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\nHistorical Context<\/p>\nWhen man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\nYet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\nThe father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\nHowever, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\nLaw in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is Torah<\/span>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\nSynonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\nThese words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, niv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\nHow could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\nIsraelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\nIsrael’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\nOld Testament Laws<\/p>\nThe legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\nThe commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\nThe commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\nThe purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\nGod’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\nThe tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\nBy means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\nThe priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\nThe holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\nThe laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\nThe holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\nBoth promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\nThe Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\nPurposes of the Law<\/p>\nThe law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\nThe law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\nThe purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\nMaturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\nGod’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Historical Context<\/p>\n• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\nHistorical Context<\/p>\nWhen man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\nYet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\nThe father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\nHowever, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\nLaw in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is Torah<\/span>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\nSynonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\nThese words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, niv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\nHow could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\nIsraelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\nIsrael’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\nOld Testament Laws<\/p>\nThe legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\nThe commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\nThe commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\nThe purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\nGod’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\nThe tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\nBy means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\nThe priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\nThe holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\nThe laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\nThe holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\nBoth promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\nThe Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\nPurposes of the Law<\/p>\nThe law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\nThe law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\nThe purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\nMaturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","summary_en":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31452,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Promise","title_en":"Promise","content_ro":"<h3>PROMISE<\/h3>\nDeclaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified.<\/p>\nTypes of Promise<\/p>\nIn biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who gives them is totally able to perform that which he has promised (Rom 4:21).<\/p>\nDivine promises in Scripture assure their recipients of many spiritual and temporal benefits, including sonship (2 Cor 6:16–7:1), forgiveness of sin (1 Jn 1:9), answer to prayer (Lk 11:9), deliverance from temptations (1 Cor 10:13), sustaining grace for difficult times (2 Cor 12:9), provision for all needs (Phil 4:19), reward for obedience (Jas 1:12), and eternal life (Lk 18:29-30; Jn 3:16; Rom 6:22-23). God’s promises are certain and sure, but participation in their blessing often requires that certain conditions on which they are predicated be met. Divine promises also are not always guarantees of blessing. Indeed, there are promises announcing the certainty of judgment on those who refuse to obey the gospel of the Lord Jesus (2 Thes 1:8-9).<\/p>\nIn addition to the promises of God, which have subjective and individual application to many different people in widely different times and places, there are a great many promises that pertain to the programmatic unfolding of God’s plan of redemption in a grand procession of historical events. These promises have neither repeated applications nor conditional natures. In such cases, promise becomes nearly synonymous with prophecy, and promises of this type, along with their subsequent fulfillment, are intricately intertwined in the entire fabric of redemptive history.<\/p>\nPromises in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe highlights of the promise theme in the OT can be seen in the promise of what is often termed the protevangelium (i.e., the first announcement of the gospel) given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden immediately after the fall into sin (Gn 3:15). Subsequent promises are the covenants God made with Abraham (chs 12; 15; 17) and with David (2 Sm 7), followed by the promise of a new covenant (Jer 31).<\/p>\n<h5>The Protevangelium<\/h5>\nGenesis 3:15b says: “Your [Satan’s] offspring and her [Eve’s] offspring will be enemies. He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel” (nlt<\/span>). This statement is a promise that at some future time the offspring of the woman will crush Satan. The offspring of the woman is individualized in the “he” of the last phrase. “He” shall strike you (i.e., Satan) on the head, although Satan will inflict a wound on the offspring of the woman. Here, then, is the promise that gives Adam and Eve, as well as their descendants, the basis to expect the eventual destruction of their adversary Satan through their offspring.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to Abraham<\/h5>\nIn Genesis 12:1-7 Abraham is told to leave his people and country and to go to a land that the Lord would show to him. God, in turn, promises him that (1) his offspring would become a great nation; (2) he would be blessed and his name made great; (3) through him other nations would be blessed; and (4) the land of Canaan would be given to his descendants. Of particular significance among these promises given to Abraham is that through his offspring he will bless many nations. This promise is repeated five times in the book of Genesis (Gn 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14) and points back to the promise of Genesis 3:15 as well as forward to Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to David<\/h5>\nIn 2 Samuel 7, God gave a promise to King David that his dynasty would endure forever (2 Sm 7:16; Ps 89:34-37). It is with this Davidic covenant that the promised line, which had previously run from Adam through Seth, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Judah, is now narrowed to the royal line of the house of David. David is to be the ancestor of the Messiah-King to come (Ps 89:3, 27-37). David thus became a central figure in the history of God’s plan to redeem the world. Jesus Christ is referred to as the son of David, the son of Abraham (Mt 1:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise of a New Covenant<\/h5>\nIn Jeremiah 31:31-37, it is promised that in future days the Lord would make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. The content of this new covenant reemphasizes and extends the basic promises of the former covenant: “I will be their God, and they will be my people. . . . I will forgive their wickedness and will never again remember their sins” (vv 33-34, nlt<\/span>). It would appear that the “new covenant” of Jeremiah is to be viewed as a restatement of the same basic promises included in the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants.<\/p>\nThe new covenant was inaugurated with the first advent of Christ, and believers in Christ are now recipients by the Holy Spirit of the blessings of that new covenant (Heb 8:6-13). The complete and final realization of these blessings in all their fullness awaits the return of Christ, the complete establishment of his kingdom in its outward and final form, and the blessedness of life in the new heavens and new earth. In the intervening time, God’s people live in a day in which some of the benefits of the age to come are a present reality but the fullness of the new age is yet future.<\/p>\nThe Promise Theme in the New Testament<\/p>\nNew Testament writers refer to the OT promises in a way that indicates that they did not view these promises as separate and isolated assertions but rather as portions of a unitary promise that is ultimately fulfilled in Christ (see Lk 1:54-55, 69-73; Acts 13:23, 32-33; 26:6-7; 2 Cor 1:20). Jesus is the fulfillment of the promises made to the patriarchs and David, and these promises are accordingly to be viewed as having a single focal point in him.<\/p>\nIn the books of Galatians and Ephesians, Paul develops this idea in more detail, saying to the Gentile Christians that they are made “heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Eph 3:6, niv<\/span>). In fact, Paul says that Gentiles who trust in Christ are incorporated into the seed of Abraham and are thus heirs according to the promise (Gal 3:29), and he even goes so far as to equate the gospel with the promise given to Abraham when he states, “The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: ‘All nations will be blessed through you’ ” (Gal 3:8, niv<\/span>). These and other NT texts establish the close connection between the coming of Christ and the fulfillment of the promise. The promises of God find their point of convergence in Christ and all that he accomplished, and will yet accomplish, for his people.<\/p>\nOne further aspect of the promise particularly emphasized in the NT concerns the coming of the Holy Spirit. Paul refers to believers as sealed with the promised Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13), and as receiving the promise of the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The gift of the Holy Spirit is not only the fulfillment of an OT promise (Is 32:15; Ez 36:27; Jl 2:28), and that of Christ himself (Lk 24:49; Jn 14:16, 20; Acts 1:4), but it is also itself a promise of something yet future. Paul speaks of the Holy Spirit’s presence within the believer as a guarantee of our inheritance (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14). The Holy Spirit is the “firstfruit” of future glory (Rom 8:23).<\/p>\nOne final aspect of the promise theme in the NT concerns the assurance of Christ’s second advent and the establishment of the new heavens and the new earth (cf. Jn 14:1-3; 2 Pt 3:4, 9, 13).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Covenant; God, Being and Attributes of; Hope; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROMISE<\/h3>\nDeclaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified.<\/p>\nTypes of Promise<\/p>\nIn biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who gives them is totally able to perform that which he has promised (Rom 4:21).<\/p>\nDivine promises in Scripture assure their recipients of many spiritual and temporal benefits, including sonship (2 Cor 6:16–7:1), forgiveness of sin (1 Jn 1:9), answer to prayer (Lk 11:9), deliverance from temptations (1 Cor 10:13), sustaining grace for difficult times (2 Cor 12:9), provision for all needs (Phil 4:19), reward for obedience (Jas 1:12), and eternal life (Lk 18:29-30; Jn 3:16; Rom 6:22-23). God’s promises are certain and sure, but participation in their blessing often requires that certain conditions on which they are predicated be met. Divine promises also are not always guarantees of blessing. Indeed, there are promises announcing the certainty of judgment on those who refuse to obey the gospel of the Lord Jesus (2 Thes 1:8-9).<\/p>\nIn addition to the promises of God, which have subjective and individual application to many different people in widely different times and places, there are a great many promises that pertain to the programmatic unfolding of God’s plan of redemption in a grand procession of historical events. These promises have neither repeated applications nor conditional natures. In such cases, promise becomes nearly synonymous with prophecy, and promises of this type, along with their subsequent fulfillment, are intricately intertwined in the entire fabric of redemptive history.<\/p>\nPromises in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe highlights of the promise theme in the OT can be seen in the promise of what is often termed the protevangelium (i.e., the first announcement of the gospel) given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden immediately after the fall into sin (Gn 3:15). Subsequent promises are the covenants God made with Abraham (chs 12; 15; 17) and with David (2 Sm 7), followed by the promise of a new covenant (Jer 31).<\/p>\n<h5>The Protevangelium<\/h5>\nGenesis 3:15b says: “Your [Satan’s] offspring and her [Eve’s] offspring will be enemies. He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel” (nlt<\/span>). This statement is a promise that at some future time the offspring of the woman will crush Satan. The offspring of the woman is individualized in the “he” of the last phrase. “He” shall strike you (i.e., Satan) on the head, although Satan will inflict a wound on the offspring of the woman. Here, then, is the promise that gives Adam and Eve, as well as their descendants, the basis to expect the eventual destruction of their adversary Satan through their offspring.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to Abraham<\/h5>\nIn Genesis 12:1-7 Abraham is told to leave his people and country and to go to a land that the Lord would show to him. God, in turn, promises him that (1) his offspring would become a great nation; (2) he would be blessed and his name made great; (3) through him other nations would be blessed; and (4) the land of Canaan would be given to his descendants. Of particular significance among these promises given to Abraham is that through his offspring he will bless many nations. This promise is repeated five times in the book of Genesis (Gn 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14) and points back to the promise of Genesis 3:15 as well as forward to Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise to David<\/h5>\nIn 2 Samuel 7, God gave a promise to King David that his dynasty would endure forever (2 Sm 7:16; Ps 89:34-37). It is with this Davidic covenant that the promised line, which had previously run from Adam through Seth, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Judah, is now narrowed to the royal line of the house of David. David is to be the ancestor of the Messiah-King to come (Ps 89:3, 27-37). David thus became a central figure in the history of God’s plan to redeem the world. Jesus Christ is referred to as the son of David, the son of Abraham (Mt 1:1).<\/p>\n<h5>The Promise of a New Covenant<\/h5>\nIn Jeremiah 31:31-37, it is promised that in future days the Lord would make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. The content of this new covenant reemphasizes and extends the basic promises of the former covenant: “I will be their God, and they will be my people. . . . I will forgive their wickedness and will never again remember their sins” (vv 33-34, nlt<\/span>). It would appear that the “new covenant” of Jeremiah is to be viewed as a restatement of the same basic promises included in the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants.<\/p>\nThe new covenant was inaugurated with the first advent of Christ, and believers in Christ are now recipients by the Holy Spirit of the blessings of that new covenant (Heb 8:6-13). The complete and final realization of these blessings in all their fullness awaits the return of Christ, the complete establishment of his kingdom in its outward and final form, and the blessedness of life in the new heavens and new earth. In the intervening time, God’s people live in a day in which some of the benefits of the age to come are a present reality but the fullness of the new age is yet future.<\/p>\nThe Promise Theme in the New Testament<\/p>\nNew Testament writers refer to the OT promises in a way that indicates that they did not view these promises as separate and isolated assertions but rather as portions of a unitary promise that is ultimately fulfilled in Christ (see Lk 1:54-55, 69-73; Acts 13:23, 32-33; 26:6-7; 2 Cor 1:20). Jesus is the fulfillment of the promises made to the patriarchs and David, and these promises are accordingly to be viewed as having a single focal point in him.<\/p>\nIn the books of Galatians and Ephesians, Paul develops this idea in more detail, saying to the Gentile Christians that they are made “heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Eph 3:6, niv<\/span>). In fact, Paul says that Gentiles who trust in Christ are incorporated into the seed of Abraham and are thus heirs according to the promise (Gal 3:29), and he even goes so far as to equate the gospel with the promise given to Abraham when he states, “The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: ‘All nations will be blessed through you’ ” (Gal 3:8, niv<\/span>). These and other NT texts establish the close connection between the coming of Christ and the fulfillment of the promise. The promises of God find their point of convergence in Christ and all that he accomplished, and will yet accomplish, for his people.<\/p>\nOne further aspect of the promise particularly emphasized in the NT concerns the coming of the Holy Spirit. Paul refers to believers as sealed with the promised Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13), and as receiving the promise of the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The gift of the Holy Spirit is not only the fulfillment of an OT promise (Is 32:15; Ez 36:27; Jl 2:28), and that of Christ himself (Lk 24:49; Jn 14:16, 20; Acts 1:4), but it is also itself a promise of something yet future. Paul speaks of the Holy Spirit’s presence within the believer as a guarantee of our inheritance (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14). The Holy Spirit is the “firstfruit” of future glory (Rom 8:23).<\/p>\nOne final aspect of the promise theme in the NT concerns the assurance of Christ’s second advent and the establishment of the new heavens and the new earth (cf. Jn 14:1-3; 2 Pt 3:4, 9, 13).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Covenant; God, Being and Attributes of; Hope; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROMISE Declaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified. Types of Promise In biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who giv...","summary_en":"PROMISE Declaration by one person to another that something will or will not be done, giving the person to whom it is made the right to expect the performance of whatever has been specified. Types of Promise In biblical usage there are scattered examples of promises that people give either to one another (e.g., Nm 22:17; Est 4:7) or to God (e.g., Neh 5:12), but the promises that God gives to man are far more significant. These divine promises are absolutely trustworthy because the one who giv...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":59932,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Circumcision","title_en":"Circumcision","content_ro":"<h3>Circumcision<\/h3>\nCircumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26).<\/p>\nGod chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-14) and remind them to live in faithfulness to the covenant.<\/p>\nAlthough circumcision was applied to adult males when they joined the covenant community (Gen 17:23-27; Exod 12:48; Josh 5:3-7), it was usually performed on infants (Gen 21:4; Lev 12:3), who received God’s promises and membership in the covenant community through their parents. Faith was required in order to receive God’s blessings, however, as can be seen in the differentiation between Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, and Joseph and his brothers. Non-Israelites could also obligate themselves to Israel’s covenant (Exod 12:48; cp. Gen 34:15-24), and circumcision marked their inclusion into the worshiping community (e.g., Exod 12:44).<\/p>\nCircumcision would help Israel recognize and remember that they must lay aside natural impurity. God’s people had to be loyal to the covenant, to the family, and to their own marriages. Intermarriage with uncircumcised people who were not of the covenant was a violation of the covenant. Any man who refused to be circumcised (physically cut<\/em> in this symbolic way) would be cut<\/em> off from the covenant people because of his disobedience to God’s command (Gen 17:14).<\/p>\nCircumcision is a symbol of separation from the world, of purity, and of loyalty to the covenant. It provides the powerful metaphor of “circumcision of the heart,” which designates a heart that is committed to God and is inwardly set apart to God, rather than being stubbornly resistant (Lev 26:41; Deut 30:6; Jer 4:4; 9:26; Eph 2:11). Circumcision of the heart evidences salvation and fellowship with God (see Ezek 18:31-32; 36:25-27; Rom 2:28-29; 4:11).<\/p>\nWhen Jesus Christ established God’s new covenant, he fulfilled the requirements of the old covenant. It is not necessary for Gentile believers to be circumcised, since they are incorporated into the people of God through faith in Christ (Acts 15:1-29; Rom 2:25-29; Gal 2:1-10; 6:15; Col 2:11-12). One must turn in confidence to God and his promises, lay aside sinful behavior and the customs of the world, and live a new life by faith (see Jer 31:33-34; Rom 8:1-17; Gal 5:16–6:10).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 17:9-14, 23-27; 21:4; 34:1-26; Exod 4:24-26; 12:48; Lev 12:3; Josh 5:2-8; Jer 9:25-26; Ezek 44:7-9; Luke 1:59; 2:21; Acts 15:1-31; 16:1-5; Rom 2:25-29; 1 Cor 7:17-19; Gal 5:1-6, 11-12; 6:12-16; Eph 2:11-18; Phil 3:2-7; Col 2:11; 3:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Circumcision<\/h3>\nCircumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26).<\/p>\nGod chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-14) and remind them to live in faithfulness to the covenant.<\/p>\nAlthough circumcision was applied to adult males when they joined the covenant community (Gen 17:23-27; Exod 12:48; Josh 5:3-7), it was usually performed on infants (Gen 21:4; Lev 12:3), who received God’s promises and membership in the covenant community through their parents. Faith was required in order to receive God’s blessings, however, as can be seen in the differentiation between Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, and Joseph and his brothers. Non-Israelites could also obligate themselves to Israel’s covenant (Exod 12:48; cp. Gen 34:15-24), and circumcision marked their inclusion into the worshiping community (e.g., Exod 12:44).<\/p>\nCircumcision would help Israel recognize and remember that they must lay aside natural impurity. God’s people had to be loyal to the covenant, to the family, and to their own marriages. Intermarriage with uncircumcised people who were not of the covenant was a violation of the covenant. Any man who refused to be circumcised (physically cut<\/em> in this symbolic way) would be cut<\/em> off from the covenant people because of his disobedience to God’s command (Gen 17:14).<\/p>\nCircumcision is a symbol of separation from the world, of purity, and of loyalty to the covenant. It provides the powerful metaphor of “circumcision of the heart,” which designates a heart that is committed to God and is inwardly set apart to God, rather than being stubbornly resistant (Lev 26:41; Deut 30:6; Jer 4:4; 9:26; Eph 2:11). Circumcision of the heart evidences salvation and fellowship with God (see Ezek 18:31-32; 36:25-27; Rom 2:28-29; 4:11).<\/p>\nWhen Jesus Christ established God’s new covenant, he fulfilled the requirements of the old covenant. It is not necessary for Gentile believers to be circumcised, since they are incorporated into the people of God through faith in Christ (Acts 15:1-29; Rom 2:25-29; Gal 2:1-10; 6:15; Col 2:11-12). One must turn in confidence to God and his promises, lay aside sinful behavior and the customs of the world, and live a new life by faith (see Jer 31:33-34; Rom 8:1-17; Gal 5:16–6:10).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 17:9-14, 23-27; 21:4; 34:1-26; Exod 4:24-26; 12:48; Lev 12:3; Josh 5:2-8; Jer 9:25-26; Ezek 44:7-9; Luke 1:59; 2:21; Acts 15:1-31; 16:1-5; Rom 2:25-29; 1 Cor 7:17-19; Gal 5:1-6, 11-12; 6:12-16; Eph 2:11-18; Phil 3:2-7; Col 2:11; 3:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Circumcision Circumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26). God chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-...","summary_en":"Circumcision Circumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26). God chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60241,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant","title_en":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant<\/h3>\nNearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him.<\/p>\nUpon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Red Sea crossing, they learned of God’s unique power. In the wilderness, they learned about God’s providential care. But they still did not know God’s character. The covenant at Sinai was designed to teach the Israelites about God’s nature and character as they lived out his Torah<\/span>,<\/em> his instructions.<\/p>\nThe covenant used a familiar political form, the suzerain-vassal treaty,<\/em> in which a great king (the suzerain<\/em>) made a treaty with a nation he had subjected as a vassal<\/em> people. In such a treaty, the conquered people would declare their absolute loyalty to the king and obedience to his demands. The king, for his part, would promise to care for the conquered people and protect them from any enemies who might attack them. In the covenant at Sinai, God called the people to absolute loyalty to himself as the only God and to a life that reflected his will and nature as their sovereign Creator.<\/p>\nGod wanted a very simple and straightforward response of obedience from the Israelites. But ever since the Fall (Gen 3), there has been something fundamentally wrong with the human spirit. Simple obedience was thus impossible for the Israelites, whose hearts were unchanged. The covenant was a good thing, but it was weak in that it was incapable of making the Israelites able to follow it (Rom 7:12; 8:3). Unless God graciously bestows his Spirit upon us, we will never be able to do the things we must do; we will never share the character of the Creator. Now, through the cross of Christ, God has made it possible for us to be empowered by the Spirit and thus to fulfill his covenant purpose by sharing his holy character.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 9:1; 19:3-6; Lev 11:44-45; Jer 31:33-34; 32:40; John 16:5-11; Rom 8:5-14; 10:8-17; Gal 5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant<\/h3>\nNearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him.<\/p>\nUpon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Red Sea crossing, they learned of God’s unique power. In the wilderness, they learned about God’s providential care. But they still did not know God’s character. The covenant at Sinai was designed to teach the Israelites about God’s nature and character as they lived out his Torah<\/span>,<\/em> his instructions.<\/p>\nThe covenant used a familiar political form, the suzerain-vassal treaty,<\/em> in which a great king (the suzerain<\/em>) made a treaty with a nation he had subjected as a vassal<\/em> people. In such a treaty, the conquered people would declare their absolute loyalty to the king and obedience to his demands. The king, for his part, would promise to care for the conquered people and protect them from any enemies who might attack them. In the covenant at Sinai, God called the people to absolute loyalty to himself as the only God and to a life that reflected his will and nature as their sovereign Creator.<\/p>\nGod wanted a very simple and straightforward response of obedience from the Israelites. But ever since the Fall (Gen 3), there has been something fundamentally wrong with the human spirit. Simple obedience was thus impossible for the Israelites, whose hearts were unchanged. The covenant was a good thing, but it was weak in that it was incapable of making the Israelites able to follow it (Rom 7:12; 8:3). Unless God graciously bestows his Spirit upon us, we will never be able to do the things we must do; we will never share the character of the Creator. Now, through the cross of Christ, God has made it possible for us to be empowered by the Spirit and thus to fulfill his covenant purpose by sharing his holy character.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 9:1; 19:3-6; Lev 11:44-45; Jer 31:33-34; 32:40; John 16:5-11; Rom 8:5-14; 10:8-17; Gal 5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant Nearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him. Upon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Re...","summary_en":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant Nearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him. Upon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Re...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61233,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Spirit’s Presence","title_en":"The Spirit’s Presence","content_ro":"<h3>The Spirit’s Presence<\/h3>\nIn the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel anointed David as the next king (16:13), the Spirit left Saul (16:14), who was disobedient and had been rejected by God as king (13:7-14; 15:10-29; cp. 28:15; Judg 16:20). After David had sinned with Bathsheba, he prayed to be spared this same judgment (Ps 51:11).<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, God’s Holy Spirit is given to all who put their faith in Christ for salvation, not just to individuals in specific roles (see Acts 2:14-21; 1 Cor 12:1-13; Eph 1:13-14). Still, the Spirit performs a similar role in equipping God’s servants to do the work that God has called them to do (see 1 Cor 12:7-10). The Old Testament departure of the Spirit from Saul tangibly demonstrates the need for the New Testament warnings not to sin against the Spirit and not to bring sorrow to the Spirit (see Mark 3:28-29; Eph 4:30; Heb 6:1-8).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 41:37-40; Exod 31:1-6; Judg 3:9-11; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6; 16:20-21; 1 Sam 10:1-10; 11:6-7; 16:13-23; 19:19-23; 2 Chr 20:13-19; 24:20-22; Ps 51:11-12; Isa 11:1-5; Jer 31:33-34; Joel 2:28-29; Mark 3:28-29; Acts 2:1-21; 4:31; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Heb 6:4-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Spirit’s Presence<\/h3>\nIn the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel anointed David as the next king (16:13), the Spirit left Saul (16:14), who was disobedient and had been rejected by God as king (13:7-14; 15:10-29; cp. 28:15; Judg 16:20). After David had sinned with Bathsheba, he prayed to be spared this same judgment (Ps 51:11).<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, God’s Holy Spirit is given to all who put their faith in Christ for salvation, not just to individuals in specific roles (see Acts 2:14-21; 1 Cor 12:1-13; Eph 1:13-14). Still, the Spirit performs a similar role in equipping God’s servants to do the work that God has called them to do (see 1 Cor 12:7-10). The Old Testament departure of the Spirit from Saul tangibly demonstrates the need for the New Testament warnings not to sin against the Spirit and not to bring sorrow to the Spirit (see Mark 3:28-29; Eph 4:30; Heb 6:1-8).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 41:37-40; Exod 31:1-6; Judg 3:9-11; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6; 16:20-21; 1 Sam 10:1-10; 11:6-7; 16:13-23; 19:19-23; 2 Chr 20:13-19; 24:20-22; Ps 51:11-12; Isa 11:1-5; Jer 31:33-34; Joel 2:28-29; Mark 3:28-29; Acts 2:1-21; 4:31; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Heb 6:4-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Spirit’s Presence In the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel...","summary_en":"The Spirit’s Presence In the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64108,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Broken Covenant","title_en":"The Broken Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","summary_en":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64278,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64614,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Knowing God","title_en":"Knowing God","content_ro":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","summary_en":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66797,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Limitations of Law","title_en":"The Limitations of Law","content_ro":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\nThe law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\nPaul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\nIf God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\nThe law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\nPaul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\nIf God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","summary_en":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67327,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Law and the Spirit","title_en":"The Law and the Spirit","content_ro":"<h3>The Law and the Spirit<\/h3>\nAn enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification?<\/p>\nWhen the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). They knew from experience that the Holy Spirit has the power to make them new people, and Paul had taught them to rely on the Spirit to guide them.<\/p>\nShortly after Paul left Galatia, Jewish-Christian teachers arrived who taught the need to observe God’s law, both to be accepted by God and to be sanctified and become mature. They argued that Paul’s approach to sanctification by the Spirit would lead to lawlessness and sin.<\/p>\nPaul responded that, just as God counts<\/em> us as righteous by faith, so also he makes<\/em> us righteous by faith, through the working of the Spirit (Gal 5:16-26). Those who rely on the Spirit and follow his leading will not sin—God’s Spirit will never lead people to sin.<\/p>\nThe real problem is not a lack of understanding regarding right and wrong. Our God-given conscience tells us when we’re doing wrong, and God’s law makes the requirements of his righteousness even clearer (Rom 7:7-12). The real problem is that, by nature, our hearts are hard and sinful, and we lack the wisdom to know the right thing to do in a given situation. By nature, we are unable to apply God’s word in a way that is consistent with his intentions.<\/p>\nThe law cannot ameliorate our condition. But when the Holy Spirit guides and controls us, he changes our hearts to do the things that please God (Gal 5:22-23; Rom 8:5-14). God’s Spirit guides his people to fulfill his law in its true sense and intent. But fulfillment of the law must not be the goal or focus—the law is just our guardian (Gal 3:24-25). Instead, we focus on trusting God, relying on the Spirit, and loving others. God’s Spirit gives us the will and the power to do these things in a way that pleases God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nNum 11:16-17, 24-30; Jer 31:33-34; Ezek 36:26-27; Luke 24:49; Acts 5:32; Rom 7:1–8:17; 12:2; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:2-5; 5:5, 16-26; Heb 12:14-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Law and the Spirit<\/h3>\nAn enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification?<\/p>\nWhen the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). They knew from experience that the Holy Spirit has the power to make them new people, and Paul had taught them to rely on the Spirit to guide them.<\/p>\nShortly after Paul left Galatia, Jewish-Christian teachers arrived who taught the need to observe God’s law, both to be accepted by God and to be sanctified and become mature. They argued that Paul’s approach to sanctification by the Spirit would lead to lawlessness and sin.<\/p>\nPaul responded that, just as God counts<\/em> us as righteous by faith, so also he makes<\/em> us righteous by faith, through the working of the Spirit (Gal 5:16-26). Those who rely on the Spirit and follow his leading will not sin—God’s Spirit will never lead people to sin.<\/p>\nThe real problem is not a lack of understanding regarding right and wrong. Our God-given conscience tells us when we’re doing wrong, and God’s law makes the requirements of his righteousness even clearer (Rom 7:7-12). The real problem is that, by nature, our hearts are hard and sinful, and we lack the wisdom to know the right thing to do in a given situation. By nature, we are unable to apply God’s word in a way that is consistent with his intentions.<\/p>\nThe law cannot ameliorate our condition. But when the Holy Spirit guides and controls us, he changes our hearts to do the things that please God (Gal 5:22-23; Rom 8:5-14). God’s Spirit guides his people to fulfill his law in its true sense and intent. But fulfillment of the law must not be the goal or focus—the law is just our guardian (Gal 3:24-25). Instead, we focus on trusting God, relying on the Spirit, and loving others. God’s Spirit gives us the will and the power to do these things in a way that pleases God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nNum 11:16-17, 24-30; Jer 31:33-34; Ezek 36:26-27; Luke 24:49; Acts 5:32; Rom 7:1–8:17; 12:2; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:2-5; 5:5, 16-26; Heb 12:14-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Law and the Spirit An enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification? When the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). Th...","summary_en":"The Law and the Spirit An enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification? When the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). Th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87558,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Circumcision","title_en":"Circumcision","content_ro":"<h3>Circumcision<\/h3>\nCircumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26).<\/p>\nGod chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-14) and remind them to live in faithfulness to the covenant.<\/p>\nAlthough circumcision was applied to adult males when they joined the covenant community (Gen 17:23-27; Exod 12:48; Josh 5:3-7), it was usually performed on infants (Gen 21:4; Lev 12:3), who received God’s promises and membership in the covenant community through their parents. Faith was required in order to receive God’s blessings, however, as can be seen in the differentiation between Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, and Joseph and his brothers. Non-Israelites could also obligate themselves to Israel’s covenant (Exod 12:48; cp. Gen 34:15-24), and circumcision marked their inclusion into the worshiping community (e.g., Exod 12:44).<\/p>\nCircumcision would help Israel recognize and remember that they must lay aside natural impurity. God’s people had to be loyal to the covenant, to the family, and to their own marriages. Intermarriage with uncircumcised people who were not of the covenant was a violation of the covenant. Any man who refused to be circumcised (physically cut<\/em> in this symbolic way) would be cut<\/em> off from the covenant people because of his disobedience to God’s command (Gen 17:14).<\/p>\nCircumcision is a symbol of separation from the world, of purity, and of loyalty to the covenant. It provides the powerful metaphor of “circumcision of the heart,” which designates a heart that is committed to God and is inwardly set apart to God, rather than being stubbornly resistant (Lev 26:41; Deut 30:6; Jer 4:4; 9:26; Eph 2:11). Circumcision of the heart evidences salvation and fellowship with God (see Ezek 18:31-32; 36:25-27; Rom 2:28-29; 4:11).<\/p>\nWhen Jesus Christ established God’s new covenant, he fulfilled the requirements of the old covenant. It is not necessary for Gentile believers to be circumcised, since they are incorporated into the people of God through faith in Christ (Acts 15:1-29; Rom 2:25-29; Gal 2:1-10; 6:15; Col 2:11-12). One must turn in confidence to God and his promises, lay aside sinful behavior and the customs of the world, and live a new life by faith (see Jer 31:33-34; Rom 8:1-17; Gal 5:16–6:10).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 17:9-14, 23-27; 21:4; 34:1-26; Exod 4:24-26; 12:48; Lev 12:3; Josh 5:2-8; Jer 9:25-26; Ezek 44:7-9; Luke 1:59; 2:21; Acts 15:1-31; 16:1-5; Rom 2:25-29; 1 Cor 7:17-19; Gal 5:1-6, 11-12; 6:12-16; Eph 2:11-18; Phil 3:2-7; Col 2:11; 3:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Circumcision<\/h3>\nCircumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26).<\/p>\nGod chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-14) and remind them to live in faithfulness to the covenant.<\/p>\nAlthough circumcision was applied to adult males when they joined the covenant community (Gen 17:23-27; Exod 12:48; Josh 5:3-7), it was usually performed on infants (Gen 21:4; Lev 12:3), who received God’s promises and membership in the covenant community through their parents. Faith was required in order to receive God’s blessings, however, as can be seen in the differentiation between Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, and Joseph and his brothers. Non-Israelites could also obligate themselves to Israel’s covenant (Exod 12:48; cp. Gen 34:15-24), and circumcision marked their inclusion into the worshiping community (e.g., Exod 12:44).<\/p>\nCircumcision would help Israel recognize and remember that they must lay aside natural impurity. God’s people had to be loyal to the covenant, to the family, and to their own marriages. Intermarriage with uncircumcised people who were not of the covenant was a violation of the covenant. Any man who refused to be circumcised (physically cut<\/em> in this symbolic way) would be cut<\/em> off from the covenant people because of his disobedience to God’s command (Gen 17:14).<\/p>\nCircumcision is a symbol of separation from the world, of purity, and of loyalty to the covenant. It provides the powerful metaphor of “circumcision of the heart,” which designates a heart that is committed to God and is inwardly set apart to God, rather than being stubbornly resistant (Lev 26:41; Deut 30:6; Jer 4:4; 9:26; Eph 2:11). Circumcision of the heart evidences salvation and fellowship with God (see Ezek 18:31-32; 36:25-27; Rom 2:28-29; 4:11).<\/p>\nWhen Jesus Christ established God’s new covenant, he fulfilled the requirements of the old covenant. It is not necessary for Gentile believers to be circumcised, since they are incorporated into the people of God through faith in Christ (Acts 15:1-29; Rom 2:25-29; Gal 2:1-10; 6:15; Col 2:11-12). One must turn in confidence to God and his promises, lay aside sinful behavior and the customs of the world, and live a new life by faith (see Jer 31:33-34; Rom 8:1-17; Gal 5:16–6:10).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 17:9-14, 23-27; 21:4; 34:1-26; Exod 4:24-26; 12:48; Lev 12:3; Josh 5:2-8; Jer 9:25-26; Ezek 44:7-9; Luke 1:59; 2:21; Acts 15:1-31; 16:1-5; Rom 2:25-29; 1 Cor 7:17-19; Gal 5:1-6, 11-12; 6:12-16; Eph 2:11-18; Phil 3:2-7; Col 2:11; 3:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Circumcision Circumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26). God chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-...","summary_en":"Circumcision Circumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26). God chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87867,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant","title_en":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant<\/h3>\nNearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him.<\/p>\nUpon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Red Sea crossing, they learned of God’s unique power. In the wilderness, they learned about God’s providential care. But they still did not know God’s character. The covenant at Sinai was designed to teach the Israelites about God’s nature and character as they lived out his Torah<\/span>,<\/em> his instructions.<\/p>\nThe covenant used a familiar political form, the suzerain-vassal treaty,<\/em> in which a great king (the suzerain<\/em>) made a treaty with a nation he had subjected as a vassal<\/em> people. In such a treaty, the conquered people would declare their absolute loyalty to the king and obedience to his demands. The king, for his part, would promise to care for the conquered people and protect them from any enemies who might attack them. In the covenant at Sinai, God called the people to absolute loyalty to himself as the only God and to a life that reflected his will and nature as their sovereign Creator.<\/p>\nGod wanted a very simple and straightforward response of obedience from the Israelites. But ever since the Fall (Gen 3), there has been something fundamentally wrong with the human spirit. Simple obedience was thus impossible for the Israelites, whose hearts were unchanged. The covenant was a good thing, but it was weak in that it was incapable of making the Israelites able to follow it (Rom 7:12; 8:3). Unless God graciously bestows his Spirit upon us, we will never be able to do the things we must do; we will never share the character of the Creator. Now, through the cross of Christ, God has made it possible for us to be empowered by the Spirit and thus to fulfill his covenant purpose by sharing his holy character.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 9:1; 19:3-6; Lev 11:44-45; Jer 31:33-34; 32:40; John 16:5-11; Rom 8:5-14; 10:8-17; Gal 5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant<\/h3>\nNearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him.<\/p>\nUpon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Red Sea crossing, they learned of God’s unique power. In the wilderness, they learned about God’s providential care. But they still did not know God’s character. The covenant at Sinai was designed to teach the Israelites about God’s nature and character as they lived out his Torah<\/span>,<\/em> his instructions.<\/p>\nThe covenant used a familiar political form, the suzerain-vassal treaty,<\/em> in which a great king (the suzerain<\/em>) made a treaty with a nation he had subjected as a vassal<\/em> people. In such a treaty, the conquered people would declare their absolute loyalty to the king and obedience to his demands. The king, for his part, would promise to care for the conquered people and protect them from any enemies who might attack them. In the covenant at Sinai, God called the people to absolute loyalty to himself as the only God and to a life that reflected his will and nature as their sovereign Creator.<\/p>\nGod wanted a very simple and straightforward response of obedience from the Israelites. But ever since the Fall (Gen 3), there has been something fundamentally wrong with the human spirit. Simple obedience was thus impossible for the Israelites, whose hearts were unchanged. The covenant was a good thing, but it was weak in that it was incapable of making the Israelites able to follow it (Rom 7:12; 8:3). Unless God graciously bestows his Spirit upon us, we will never be able to do the things we must do; we will never share the character of the Creator. Now, through the cross of Christ, God has made it possible for us to be empowered by the Spirit and thus to fulfill his covenant purpose by sharing his holy character.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 9:1; 19:3-6; Lev 11:44-45; Jer 31:33-34; 32:40; John 16:5-11; Rom 8:5-14; 10:8-17; Gal 5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant Nearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him. Upon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Re...","summary_en":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant Nearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him. Upon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Re...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88859,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Spirit’s Presence","title_en":"The Spirit’s Presence","content_ro":"<h3>The Spirit’s Presence<\/h3>\nIn the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel anointed David as the next king (16:13), the Spirit left Saul (16:14), who was disobedient and had been rejected by God as king (13:7-14; 15:10-29; cp. 28:15; Judg 16:20). After David had sinned with Bathsheba, he prayed to be spared this same judgment (Ps 51:11).<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, God’s Holy Spirit is given to all who put their faith in Christ for salvation, not just to individuals in specific roles (see Acts 2:14-21; 1 Cor 12:1-13; Eph 1:13-14). Still, the Spirit performs a similar role in equipping God’s servants to do the work that God has called them to do (see 1 Cor 12:7-10). The Old Testament departure of the Spirit from Saul tangibly demonstrates the need for the New Testament warnings not to sin against the Spirit and not to bring sorrow to the Spirit (see Mark 3:28-29; Eph 4:30; Heb 6:1-8).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 41:37-40; Exod 31:1-6; Judg 3:9-11; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6; 16:20-21; 1 Sam 10:1-10; 11:6-7; 16:13-23; 19:19-23; 2 Chr 20:13-19; 24:20-22; Ps 51:11-12; Isa 11:1-5; Jer 31:33-34; Joel 2:28-29; Mark 3:28-29; Acts 2:1-21; 4:31; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Heb 6:4-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Spirit’s Presence<\/h3>\nIn the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel anointed David as the next king (16:13), the Spirit left Saul (16:14), who was disobedient and had been rejected by God as king (13:7-14; 15:10-29; cp. 28:15; Judg 16:20). After David had sinned with Bathsheba, he prayed to be spared this same judgment (Ps 51:11).<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, God’s Holy Spirit is given to all who put their faith in Christ for salvation, not just to individuals in specific roles (see Acts 2:14-21; 1 Cor 12:1-13; Eph 1:13-14). Still, the Spirit performs a similar role in equipping God’s servants to do the work that God has called them to do (see 1 Cor 12:7-10). The Old Testament departure of the Spirit from Saul tangibly demonstrates the need for the New Testament warnings not to sin against the Spirit and not to bring sorrow to the Spirit (see Mark 3:28-29; Eph 4:30; Heb 6:1-8).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 41:37-40; Exod 31:1-6; Judg 3:9-11; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6; 16:20-21; 1 Sam 10:1-10; 11:6-7; 16:13-23; 19:19-23; 2 Chr 20:13-19; 24:20-22; Ps 51:11-12; Isa 11:1-5; Jer 31:33-34; Joel 2:28-29; Mark 3:28-29; Acts 2:1-21; 4:31; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Heb 6:4-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Spirit’s Presence In the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel...","summary_en":"The Spirit’s Presence In the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91734,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Broken Covenant","title_en":"The Broken Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","summary_en":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91904,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92240,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Knowing God","title_en":"Knowing God","content_ro":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","summary_en":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94423,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Limitations of Law","title_en":"The Limitations of Law","content_ro":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\nThe law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\nPaul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\nIf God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\nThe law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\nPaul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\nIf God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","summary_en":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94953,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Law and the Spirit","title_en":"The Law and the Spirit","content_ro":"<h3>The Law and the Spirit<\/h3>\nAn enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification?<\/p>\nWhen the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). They knew from experience that the Holy Spirit has the power to make them new people, and Paul had taught them to rely on the Spirit to guide them.<\/p>\nShortly after Paul left Galatia, Jewish-Christian teachers arrived who taught the need to observe God’s law, both to be accepted by God and to be sanctified and become mature. They argued that Paul’s approach to sanctification by the Spirit would lead to lawlessness and sin.<\/p>\nPaul responded that, just as God counts<\/em> us as righteous by faith, so also he makes<\/em> us righteous by faith, through the working of the Spirit (Gal 5:16-26). Those who rely on the Spirit and follow his leading will not sin—God’s Spirit will never lead people to sin.<\/p>\nThe real problem is not a lack of understanding regarding right and wrong. Our God-given conscience tells us when we’re doing wrong, and God’s law makes the requirements of his righteousness even clearer (Rom 7:7-12). The real problem is that, by nature, our hearts are hard and sinful, and we lack the wisdom to know the right thing to do in a given situation. By nature, we are unable to apply God’s word in a way that is consistent with his intentions.<\/p>\nThe law cannot ameliorate our condition. But when the Holy Spirit guides and controls us, he changes our hearts to do the things that please God (Gal 5:22-23; Rom 8:5-14). God’s Spirit guides his people to fulfill his law in its true sense and intent. But fulfillment of the law must not be the goal or focus—the law is just our guardian (Gal 3:24-25). Instead, we focus on trusting God, relying on the Spirit, and loving others. God’s Spirit gives us the will and the power to do these things in a way that pleases God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nNum 11:16-17, 24-30; Jer 31:33-34; Ezek 36:26-27; Luke 24:49; Acts 5:32; Rom 7:1–8:17; 12:2; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:2-5; 5:5, 16-26; Heb 12:14-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Law and the Spirit<\/h3>\nAn enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification?<\/p>\nWhen the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). They knew from experience that the Holy Spirit has the power to make them new people, and Paul had taught them to rely on the Spirit to guide them.<\/p>\nShortly after Paul left Galatia, Jewish-Christian teachers arrived who taught the need to observe God’s law, both to be accepted by God and to be sanctified and become mature. They argued that Paul’s approach to sanctification by the Spirit would lead to lawlessness and sin.<\/p>\nPaul responded that, just as God counts<\/em> us as righteous by faith, so also he makes<\/em> us righteous by faith, through the working of the Spirit (Gal 5:16-26). Those who rely on the Spirit and follow his leading will not sin—God’s Spirit will never lead people to sin.<\/p>\nThe real problem is not a lack of understanding regarding right and wrong. Our God-given conscience tells us when we’re doing wrong, and God’s law makes the requirements of his righteousness even clearer (Rom 7:7-12). The real problem is that, by nature, our hearts are hard and sinful, and we lack the wisdom to know the right thing to do in a given situation. By nature, we are unable to apply God’s word in a way that is consistent with his intentions.<\/p>\nThe law cannot ameliorate our condition. But when the Holy Spirit guides and controls us, he changes our hearts to do the things that please God (Gal 5:22-23; Rom 8:5-14). God’s Spirit guides his people to fulfill his law in its true sense and intent. But fulfillment of the law must not be the goal or focus—the law is just our guardian (Gal 3:24-25). Instead, we focus on trusting God, relying on the Spirit, and loving others. God’s Spirit gives us the will and the power to do these things in a way that pleases God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nNum 11:16-17, 24-30; Jer 31:33-34; Ezek 36:26-27; Luke 24:49; Acts 5:32; Rom 7:1–8:17; 12:2; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:2-5; 5:5, 16-26; Heb 12:14-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Law and the Spirit An enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification? When the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). Th...","summary_en":"The Law and the Spirit An enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification? When the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). Th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115184,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Circumcision","title_en":"Circumcision","content_ro":"<h3>Circumcision<\/h3>\nCircumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26).<\/p>\nGod chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-14) and remind them to live in faithfulness to the covenant.<\/p>\nAlthough circumcision was applied to adult males when they joined the covenant community (Gen 17:23-27; Exod 12:48; Josh 5:3-7), it was usually performed on infants (Gen 21:4; Lev 12:3), who received God’s promises and membership in the covenant community through their parents. Faith was required in order to receive God’s blessings, however, as can be seen in the differentiation between Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, and Joseph and his brothers. Non-Israelites could also obligate themselves to Israel’s covenant (Exod 12:48; cp. Gen 34:15-24), and circumcision marked their inclusion into the worshiping community (e.g., Exod 12:44).<\/p>\nCircumcision would help Israel recognize and remember that they must lay aside natural impurity. God’s people had to be loyal to the covenant, to the family, and to their own marriages. Intermarriage with uncircumcised people who were not of the covenant was a violation of the covenant. Any man who refused to be circumcised (physically cut<\/em> in this symbolic way) would be cut<\/em> off from the covenant people because of his disobedience to God’s command (Gen 17:14).<\/p>\nCircumcision is a symbol of separation from the world, of purity, and of loyalty to the covenant. It provides the powerful metaphor of “circumcision of the heart,” which designates a heart that is committed to God and is inwardly set apart to God, rather than being stubbornly resistant (Lev 26:41; Deut 30:6; Jer 4:4; 9:26; Eph 2:11). Circumcision of the heart evidences salvation and fellowship with God (see Ezek 18:31-32; 36:25-27; Rom 2:28-29; 4:11).<\/p>\nWhen Jesus Christ established God’s new covenant, he fulfilled the requirements of the old covenant. It is not necessary for Gentile believers to be circumcised, since they are incorporated into the people of God through faith in Christ (Acts 15:1-29; Rom 2:25-29; Gal 2:1-10; 6:15; Col 2:11-12). One must turn in confidence to God and his promises, lay aside sinful behavior and the customs of the world, and live a new life by faith (see Jer 31:33-34; Rom 8:1-17; Gal 5:16–6:10).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 17:9-14, 23-27; 21:4; 34:1-26; Exod 4:24-26; 12:48; Lev 12:3; Josh 5:2-8; Jer 9:25-26; Ezek 44:7-9; Luke 1:59; 2:21; Acts 15:1-31; 16:1-5; Rom 2:25-29; 1 Cor 7:17-19; Gal 5:1-6, 11-12; 6:12-16; Eph 2:11-18; Phil 3:2-7; Col 2:11; 3:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Circumcision<\/h3>\nCircumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26).<\/p>\nGod chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-14) and remind them to live in faithfulness to the covenant.<\/p>\nAlthough circumcision was applied to adult males when they joined the covenant community (Gen 17:23-27; Exod 12:48; Josh 5:3-7), it was usually performed on infants (Gen 21:4; Lev 12:3), who received God’s promises and membership in the covenant community through their parents. Faith was required in order to receive God’s blessings, however, as can be seen in the differentiation between Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, and Joseph and his brothers. Non-Israelites could also obligate themselves to Israel’s covenant (Exod 12:48; cp. Gen 34:15-24), and circumcision marked their inclusion into the worshiping community (e.g., Exod 12:44).<\/p>\nCircumcision would help Israel recognize and remember that they must lay aside natural impurity. God’s people had to be loyal to the covenant, to the family, and to their own marriages. Intermarriage with uncircumcised people who were not of the covenant was a violation of the covenant. Any man who refused to be circumcised (physically cut<\/em> in this symbolic way) would be cut<\/em> off from the covenant people because of his disobedience to God’s command (Gen 17:14).<\/p>\nCircumcision is a symbol of separation from the world, of purity, and of loyalty to the covenant. It provides the powerful metaphor of “circumcision of the heart,” which designates a heart that is committed to God and is inwardly set apart to God, rather than being stubbornly resistant (Lev 26:41; Deut 30:6; Jer 4:4; 9:26; Eph 2:11). Circumcision of the heart evidences salvation and fellowship with God (see Ezek 18:31-32; 36:25-27; Rom 2:28-29; 4:11).<\/p>\nWhen Jesus Christ established God’s new covenant, he fulfilled the requirements of the old covenant. It is not necessary for Gentile believers to be circumcised, since they are incorporated into the people of God through faith in Christ (Acts 15:1-29; Rom 2:25-29; Gal 2:1-10; 6:15; Col 2:11-12). One must turn in confidence to God and his promises, lay aside sinful behavior and the customs of the world, and live a new life by faith (see Jer 31:33-34; Rom 8:1-17; Gal 5:16–6:10).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 17:9-14, 23-27; 21:4; 34:1-26; Exod 4:24-26; 12:48; Lev 12:3; Josh 5:2-8; Jer 9:25-26; Ezek 44:7-9; Luke 1:59; 2:21; Acts 15:1-31; 16:1-5; Rom 2:25-29; 1 Cor 7:17-19; Gal 5:1-6, 11-12; 6:12-16; Eph 2:11-18; Phil 3:2-7; Col 2:11; 3:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Circumcision Circumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26). God chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-...","summary_en":"Circumcision Circumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26). God chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115493,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant","title_en":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant<\/h3>\nNearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him.<\/p>\nUpon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Red Sea crossing, they learned of God’s unique power. In the wilderness, they learned about God’s providential care. But they still did not know God’s character. The covenant at Sinai was designed to teach the Israelites about God’s nature and character as they lived out his Torah<\/span>,<\/em> his instructions.<\/p>\nThe covenant used a familiar political form, the suzerain-vassal treaty,<\/em> in which a great king (the suzerain<\/em>) made a treaty with a nation he had subjected as a vassal<\/em> people. In such a treaty, the conquered people would declare their absolute loyalty to the king and obedience to his demands. The king, for his part, would promise to care for the conquered people and protect them from any enemies who might attack them. In the covenant at Sinai, God called the people to absolute loyalty to himself as the only God and to a life that reflected his will and nature as their sovereign Creator.<\/p>\nGod wanted a very simple and straightforward response of obedience from the Israelites. But ever since the Fall (Gen 3), there has been something fundamentally wrong with the human spirit. Simple obedience was thus impossible for the Israelites, whose hearts were unchanged. The covenant was a good thing, but it was weak in that it was incapable of making the Israelites able to follow it (Rom 7:12; 8:3). Unless God graciously bestows his Spirit upon us, we will never be able to do the things we must do; we will never share the character of the Creator. Now, through the cross of Christ, God has made it possible for us to be empowered by the Spirit and thus to fulfill his covenant purpose by sharing his holy character.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 9:1; 19:3-6; Lev 11:44-45; Jer 31:33-34; 32:40; John 16:5-11; Rom 8:5-14; 10:8-17; Gal 5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant<\/h3>\nNearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him.<\/p>\nUpon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Red Sea crossing, they learned of God’s unique power. In the wilderness, they learned about God’s providential care. But they still did not know God’s character. The covenant at Sinai was designed to teach the Israelites about God’s nature and character as they lived out his Torah<\/span>,<\/em> his instructions.<\/p>\nThe covenant used a familiar political form, the suzerain-vassal treaty,<\/em> in which a great king (the suzerain<\/em>) made a treaty with a nation he had subjected as a vassal<\/em> people. In such a treaty, the conquered people would declare their absolute loyalty to the king and obedience to his demands. The king, for his part, would promise to care for the conquered people and protect them from any enemies who might attack them. In the covenant at Sinai, God called the people to absolute loyalty to himself as the only God and to a life that reflected his will and nature as their sovereign Creator.<\/p>\nGod wanted a very simple and straightforward response of obedience from the Israelites. But ever since the Fall (Gen 3), there has been something fundamentally wrong with the human spirit. Simple obedience was thus impossible for the Israelites, whose hearts were unchanged. The covenant was a good thing, but it was weak in that it was incapable of making the Israelites able to follow it (Rom 7:12; 8:3). Unless God graciously bestows his Spirit upon us, we will never be able to do the things we must do; we will never share the character of the Creator. Now, through the cross of Christ, God has made it possible for us to be empowered by the Spirit and thus to fulfill his covenant purpose by sharing his holy character.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 9:1; 19:3-6; Lev 11:44-45; Jer 31:33-34; 32:40; John 16:5-11; Rom 8:5-14; 10:8-17; Gal 5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant Nearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him. Upon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Re...","summary_en":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant Nearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him. Upon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Re...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116485,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Spirit’s Presence","title_en":"The Spirit’s Presence","content_ro":"<h3>The Spirit’s Presence<\/h3>\nIn the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel anointed David as the next king (16:13), the Spirit left Saul (16:14), who was disobedient and had been rejected by God as king (13:7-14; 15:10-29; cp. 28:15; Judg 16:20). After David had sinned with Bathsheba, he prayed to be spared this same judgment (Ps 51:11).<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, God’s Holy Spirit is given to all who put their faith in Christ for salvation, not just to individuals in specific roles (see Acts 2:14-21; 1 Cor 12:1-13; Eph 1:13-14). Still, the Spirit performs a similar role in equipping God’s servants to do the work that God has called them to do (see 1 Cor 12:7-10). The Old Testament departure of the Spirit from Saul tangibly demonstrates the need for the New Testament warnings not to sin against the Spirit and not to bring sorrow to the Spirit (see Mark 3:28-29; Eph 4:30; Heb 6:1-8).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 41:37-40; Exod 31:1-6; Judg 3:9-11; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6; 16:20-21; 1 Sam 10:1-10; 11:6-7; 16:13-23; 19:19-23; 2 Chr 20:13-19; 24:20-22; Ps 51:11-12; Isa 11:1-5; Jer 31:33-34; Joel 2:28-29; Mark 3:28-29; Acts 2:1-21; 4:31; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Heb 6:4-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Spirit’s Presence<\/h3>\nIn the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel anointed David as the next king (16:13), the Spirit left Saul (16:14), who was disobedient and had been rejected by God as king (13:7-14; 15:10-29; cp. 28:15; Judg 16:20). After David had sinned with Bathsheba, he prayed to be spared this same judgment (Ps 51:11).<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, God’s Holy Spirit is given to all who put their faith in Christ for salvation, not just to individuals in specific roles (see Acts 2:14-21; 1 Cor 12:1-13; Eph 1:13-14). Still, the Spirit performs a similar role in equipping God’s servants to do the work that God has called them to do (see 1 Cor 12:7-10). The Old Testament departure of the Spirit from Saul tangibly demonstrates the need for the New Testament warnings not to sin against the Spirit and not to bring sorrow to the Spirit (see Mark 3:28-29; Eph 4:30; Heb 6:1-8).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 41:37-40; Exod 31:1-6; Judg 3:9-11; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6; 16:20-21; 1 Sam 10:1-10; 11:6-7; 16:13-23; 19:19-23; 2 Chr 20:13-19; 24:20-22; Ps 51:11-12; Isa 11:1-5; Jer 31:33-34; Joel 2:28-29; Mark 3:28-29; Acts 2:1-21; 4:31; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Heb 6:4-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Spirit’s Presence In the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel...","summary_en":"The Spirit’s Presence In the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119360,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Broken Covenant","title_en":"The Broken Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","summary_en":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119530,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119866,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Knowing God","title_en":"Knowing God","content_ro":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","summary_en":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122049,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Limitations of Law","title_en":"The Limitations of Law","content_ro":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\nThe law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\nPaul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\nIf God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\nThe law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\nPaul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\nIf God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","summary_en":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122579,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Law and the Spirit","title_en":"The Law and the Spirit","content_ro":"<h3>The Law and the Spirit<\/h3>\nAn enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification?<\/p>\nWhen the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). They knew from experience that the Holy Spirit has the power to make them new people, and Paul had taught them to rely on the Spirit to guide them.<\/p>\nShortly after Paul left Galatia, Jewish-Christian teachers arrived who taught the need to observe God’s law, both to be accepted by God and to be sanctified and become mature. They argued that Paul’s approach to sanctification by the Spirit would lead to lawlessness and sin.<\/p>\nPaul responded that, just as God counts<\/em> us as righteous by faith, so also he makes<\/em> us righteous by faith, through the working of the Spirit (Gal 5:16-26). Those who rely on the Spirit and follow his leading will not sin—God’s Spirit will never lead people to sin.<\/p>\nThe real problem is not a lack of understanding regarding right and wrong. Our God-given conscience tells us when we’re doing wrong, and God’s law makes the requirements of his righteousness even clearer (Rom 7:7-12). The real problem is that, by nature, our hearts are hard and sinful, and we lack the wisdom to know the right thing to do in a given situation. By nature, we are unable to apply God’s word in a way that is consistent with his intentions.<\/p>\nThe law cannot ameliorate our condition. But when the Holy Spirit guides and controls us, he changes our hearts to do the things that please God (Gal 5:22-23; Rom 8:5-14). God’s Spirit guides his people to fulfill his law in its true sense and intent. But fulfillment of the law must not be the goal or focus—the law is just our guardian (Gal 3:24-25). Instead, we focus on trusting God, relying on the Spirit, and loving others. God’s Spirit gives us the will and the power to do these things in a way that pleases God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nNum 11:16-17, 24-30; Jer 31:33-34; Ezek 36:26-27; Luke 24:49; Acts 5:32; Rom 7:1–8:17; 12:2; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:2-5; 5:5, 16-26; Heb 12:14-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Law and the Spirit<\/h3>\nAn enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification?<\/p>\nWhen the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). They knew from experience that the Holy Spirit has the power to make them new people, and Paul had taught them to rely on the Spirit to guide them.<\/p>\nShortly after Paul left Galatia, Jewish-Christian teachers arrived who taught the need to observe God’s law, both to be accepted by God and to be sanctified and become mature. They argued that Paul’s approach to sanctification by the Spirit would lead to lawlessness and sin.<\/p>\nPaul responded that, just as God counts<\/em> us as righteous by faith, so also he makes<\/em> us righteous by faith, through the working of the Spirit (Gal 5:16-26). Those who rely on the Spirit and follow his leading will not sin—God’s Spirit will never lead people to sin.<\/p>\nThe real problem is not a lack of understanding regarding right and wrong. Our God-given conscience tells us when we’re doing wrong, and God’s law makes the requirements of his righteousness even clearer (Rom 7:7-12). The real problem is that, by nature, our hearts are hard and sinful, and we lack the wisdom to know the right thing to do in a given situation. By nature, we are unable to apply God’s word in a way that is consistent with his intentions.<\/p>\nThe law cannot ameliorate our condition. But when the Holy Spirit guides and controls us, he changes our hearts to do the things that please God (Gal 5:22-23; Rom 8:5-14). God’s Spirit guides his people to fulfill his law in its true sense and intent. But fulfillment of the law must not be the goal or focus—the law is just our guardian (Gal 3:24-25). Instead, we focus on trusting God, relying on the Spirit, and loving others. God’s Spirit gives us the will and the power to do these things in a way that pleases God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nNum 11:16-17, 24-30; Jer 31:33-34; Ezek 36:26-27; Luke 24:49; Acts 5:32; Rom 7:1–8:17; 12:2; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:2-5; 5:5, 16-26; Heb 12:14-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Law and the Spirit An enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification? When the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). Th...","summary_en":"The Law and the Spirit An enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification? When the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). Th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":142810,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Circumcision","title_en":"Circumcision","content_ro":"<h3>Circumcision<\/h3>\nCircumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26).<\/p>\nGod chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-14) and remind them to live in faithfulness to the covenant.<\/p>\nAlthough circumcision was applied to adult males when they joined the covenant community (Gen 17:23-27; Exod 12:48; Josh 5:3-7), it was usually performed on infants (Gen 21:4; Lev 12:3), who received God’s promises and membership in the covenant community through their parents. Faith was required in order to receive God’s blessings, however, as can be seen in the differentiation between Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, and Joseph and his brothers. Non-Israelites could also obligate themselves to Israel’s covenant (Exod 12:48; cp. Gen 34:15-24), and circumcision marked their inclusion into the worshiping community (e.g., Exod 12:44).<\/p>\nCircumcision would help Israel recognize and remember that they must lay aside natural impurity. God’s people had to be loyal to the covenant, to the family, and to their own marriages. Intermarriage with uncircumcised people who were not of the covenant was a violation of the covenant. Any man who refused to be circumcised (physically cut<\/em> in this symbolic way) would be cut<\/em> off from the covenant people because of his disobedience to God’s command (Gen 17:14).<\/p>\nCircumcision is a symbol of separation from the world, of purity, and of loyalty to the covenant. It provides the powerful metaphor of “circumcision of the heart,” which designates a heart that is committed to God and is inwardly set apart to God, rather than being stubbornly resistant (Lev 26:41; Deut 30:6; Jer 4:4; 9:26; Eph 2:11). Circumcision of the heart evidences salvation and fellowship with God (see Ezek 18:31-32; 36:25-27; Rom 2:28-29; 4:11).<\/p>\nWhen Jesus Christ established God’s new covenant, he fulfilled the requirements of the old covenant. It is not necessary for Gentile believers to be circumcised, since they are incorporated into the people of God through faith in Christ (Acts 15:1-29; Rom 2:25-29; Gal 2:1-10; 6:15; Col 2:11-12). One must turn in confidence to God and his promises, lay aside sinful behavior and the customs of the world, and live a new life by faith (see Jer 31:33-34; Rom 8:1-17; Gal 5:16–6:10).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 17:9-14, 23-27; 21:4; 34:1-26; Exod 4:24-26; 12:48; Lev 12:3; Josh 5:2-8; Jer 9:25-26; Ezek 44:7-9; Luke 1:59; 2:21; Acts 15:1-31; 16:1-5; Rom 2:25-29; 1 Cor 7:17-19; Gal 5:1-6, 11-12; 6:12-16; Eph 2:11-18; Phil 3:2-7; Col 2:11; 3:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Circumcision<\/h3>\nCircumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26).<\/p>\nGod chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-14) and remind them to live in faithfulness to the covenant.<\/p>\nAlthough circumcision was applied to adult males when they joined the covenant community (Gen 17:23-27; Exod 12:48; Josh 5:3-7), it was usually performed on infants (Gen 21:4; Lev 12:3), who received God’s promises and membership in the covenant community through their parents. Faith was required in order to receive God’s blessings, however, as can be seen in the differentiation between Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, and Joseph and his brothers. Non-Israelites could also obligate themselves to Israel’s covenant (Exod 12:48; cp. Gen 34:15-24), and circumcision marked their inclusion into the worshiping community (e.g., Exod 12:44).<\/p>\nCircumcision would help Israel recognize and remember that they must lay aside natural impurity. God’s people had to be loyal to the covenant, to the family, and to their own marriages. Intermarriage with uncircumcised people who were not of the covenant was a violation of the covenant. Any man who refused to be circumcised (physically cut<\/em> in this symbolic way) would be cut<\/em> off from the covenant people because of his disobedience to God’s command (Gen 17:14).<\/p>\nCircumcision is a symbol of separation from the world, of purity, and of loyalty to the covenant. It provides the powerful metaphor of “circumcision of the heart,” which designates a heart that is committed to God and is inwardly set apart to God, rather than being stubbornly resistant (Lev 26:41; Deut 30:6; Jer 4:4; 9:26; Eph 2:11). Circumcision of the heart evidences salvation and fellowship with God (see Ezek 18:31-32; 36:25-27; Rom 2:28-29; 4:11).<\/p>\nWhen Jesus Christ established God’s new covenant, he fulfilled the requirements of the old covenant. It is not necessary for Gentile believers to be circumcised, since they are incorporated into the people of God through faith in Christ (Acts 15:1-29; Rom 2:25-29; Gal 2:1-10; 6:15; Col 2:11-12). One must turn in confidence to God and his promises, lay aside sinful behavior and the customs of the world, and live a new life by faith (see Jer 31:33-34; Rom 8:1-17; Gal 5:16–6:10).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 17:9-14, 23-27; 21:4; 34:1-26; Exod 4:24-26; 12:48; Lev 12:3; Josh 5:2-8; Jer 9:25-26; Ezek 44:7-9; Luke 1:59; 2:21; Acts 15:1-31; 16:1-5; Rom 2:25-29; 1 Cor 7:17-19; Gal 5:1-6, 11-12; 6:12-16; Eph 2:11-18; Phil 3:2-7; Col 2:11; 3:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Circumcision Circumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26). God chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-...","summary_en":"Circumcision Circumcision, the removal of the male foreskin, was practiced by a number of cultures in the ancient world (see Jer 9:25-26). God chose circumcision as the sign of a covenant that focuses on descendants. God had promised to make Abraham and his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:3-6) and to use them to redeem the Gentile nations (12:3; see Gal 3:8-9). Circumcision was God’s signature in flesh; it would identify Abraham and his descendants as God’s own people (Gen 17:9-...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143119,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant","title_en":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant<\/h3>\nNearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him.<\/p>\nUpon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Red Sea crossing, they learned of God’s unique power. In the wilderness, they learned about God’s providential care. But they still did not know God’s character. The covenant at Sinai was designed to teach the Israelites about God’s nature and character as they lived out his Torah<\/span>,<\/em> his instructions.<\/p>\nThe covenant used a familiar political form, the suzerain-vassal treaty,<\/em> in which a great king (the suzerain<\/em>) made a treaty with a nation he had subjected as a vassal<\/em> people. In such a treaty, the conquered people would declare their absolute loyalty to the king and obedience to his demands. The king, for his part, would promise to care for the conquered people and protect them from any enemies who might attack them. In the covenant at Sinai, God called the people to absolute loyalty to himself as the only God and to a life that reflected his will and nature as their sovereign Creator.<\/p>\nGod wanted a very simple and straightforward response of obedience from the Israelites. But ever since the Fall (Gen 3), there has been something fundamentally wrong with the human spirit. Simple obedience was thus impossible for the Israelites, whose hearts were unchanged. The covenant was a good thing, but it was weak in that it was incapable of making the Israelites able to follow it (Rom 7:12; 8:3). Unless God graciously bestows his Spirit upon us, we will never be able to do the things we must do; we will never share the character of the Creator. Now, through the cross of Christ, God has made it possible for us to be empowered by the Spirit and thus to fulfill his covenant purpose by sharing his holy character.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 9:1; 19:3-6; Lev 11:44-45; Jer 31:33-34; 32:40; John 16:5-11; Rom 8:5-14; 10:8-17; Gal 5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant<\/h3>\nNearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him.<\/p>\nUpon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Red Sea crossing, they learned of God’s unique power. In the wilderness, they learned about God’s providential care. But they still did not know God’s character. The covenant at Sinai was designed to teach the Israelites about God’s nature and character as they lived out his Torah<\/span>,<\/em> his instructions.<\/p>\nThe covenant used a familiar political form, the suzerain-vassal treaty,<\/em> in which a great king (the suzerain<\/em>) made a treaty with a nation he had subjected as a vassal<\/em> people. In such a treaty, the conquered people would declare their absolute loyalty to the king and obedience to his demands. The king, for his part, would promise to care for the conquered people and protect them from any enemies who might attack them. In the covenant at Sinai, God called the people to absolute loyalty to himself as the only God and to a life that reflected his will and nature as their sovereign Creator.<\/p>\nGod wanted a very simple and straightforward response of obedience from the Israelites. But ever since the Fall (Gen 3), there has been something fundamentally wrong with the human spirit. Simple obedience was thus impossible for the Israelites, whose hearts were unchanged. The covenant was a good thing, but it was weak in that it was incapable of making the Israelites able to follow it (Rom 7:12; 8:3). Unless God graciously bestows his Spirit upon us, we will never be able to do the things we must do; we will never share the character of the Creator. Now, through the cross of Christ, God has made it possible for us to be empowered by the Spirit and thus to fulfill his covenant purpose by sharing his holy character.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 9:1; 19:3-6; Lev 11:44-45; Jer 31:33-34; 32:40; John 16:5-11; Rom 8:5-14; 10:8-17; Gal 5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant Nearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him. Upon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Re...","summary_en":"The Purpose of the Sinai Covenant Nearly everything the Israelites had learned about ultimate reality from the Egyptians was wrong. There are not many gods; there is only one God. The Creator is perfectly good, and evil is the result of rebellion against him. God’s blessings cannot be obtained through magic and manipulation; instead, they are free to those who lovingly submit to him. Upon leaving Egypt, the Israelites did not yet know God in the way that he intended. In the plagues and the Re...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144111,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Spirit’s Presence","title_en":"The Spirit’s Presence","content_ro":"<h3>The Spirit’s Presence<\/h3>\nIn the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel anointed David as the next king (16:13), the Spirit left Saul (16:14), who was disobedient and had been rejected by God as king (13:7-14; 15:10-29; cp. 28:15; Judg 16:20). After David had sinned with Bathsheba, he prayed to be spared this same judgment (Ps 51:11).<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, God’s Holy Spirit is given to all who put their faith in Christ for salvation, not just to individuals in specific roles (see Acts 2:14-21; 1 Cor 12:1-13; Eph 1:13-14). Still, the Spirit performs a similar role in equipping God’s servants to do the work that God has called them to do (see 1 Cor 12:7-10). The Old Testament departure of the Spirit from Saul tangibly demonstrates the need for the New Testament warnings not to sin against the Spirit and not to bring sorrow to the Spirit (see Mark 3:28-29; Eph 4:30; Heb 6:1-8).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 41:37-40; Exod 31:1-6; Judg 3:9-11; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6; 16:20-21; 1 Sam 10:1-10; 11:6-7; 16:13-23; 19:19-23; 2 Chr 20:13-19; 24:20-22; Ps 51:11-12; Isa 11:1-5; Jer 31:33-34; Joel 2:28-29; Mark 3:28-29; Acts 2:1-21; 4:31; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Heb 6:4-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Spirit’s Presence<\/h3>\nIn the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel anointed David as the next king (16:13), the Spirit left Saul (16:14), who was disobedient and had been rejected by God as king (13:7-14; 15:10-29; cp. 28:15; Judg 16:20). After David had sinned with Bathsheba, he prayed to be spared this same judgment (Ps 51:11).<\/p>\nIn the New Testament, God’s Holy Spirit is given to all who put their faith in Christ for salvation, not just to individuals in specific roles (see Acts 2:14-21; 1 Cor 12:1-13; Eph 1:13-14). Still, the Spirit performs a similar role in equipping God’s servants to do the work that God has called them to do (see 1 Cor 12:7-10). The Old Testament departure of the Spirit from Saul tangibly demonstrates the need for the New Testament warnings not to sin against the Spirit and not to bring sorrow to the Spirit (see Mark 3:28-29; Eph 4:30; Heb 6:1-8).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 41:37-40; Exod 31:1-6; Judg 3:9-11; 6:34; 11:29; 14:5-6; 16:20-21; 1 Sam 10:1-10; 11:6-7; 16:13-23; 19:19-23; 2 Chr 20:13-19; 24:20-22; Ps 51:11-12; Isa 11:1-5; Jer 31:33-34; Joel 2:28-29; Mark 3:28-29; Acts 2:1-21; 4:31; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; Heb 6:4-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Spirit’s Presence In the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel...","summary_en":"The Spirit’s Presence In the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon a person or group when they were called to do a task or ordained for an office. The Spirit “came upon” the judges Othniel, Gideon, and Jephthah (Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29), empowering them for service. Saul and David both received the Spirit of God when they were anointed king (1 Sam 10:1, 9-10; 16:13). The Spirit would depart when the task had been completed or when the officeholder was removed from office. When Samuel...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146986,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Broken Covenant","title_en":"The Broken Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Broken Covenant<\/h3>\nA central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it required the Lord and Israel to seal the agreement with solemn oaths of faithfulness (Exod 24:1-11; Deut 29–30; Josh 8:30-35; 24:1-28). The Lord always remained faithful to his covenant commitment, but the Israelite people repeatedly broke the covenant as Canaanite polytheism lured them away from the Lord. They broke the laws banning the worship of idols, engaged in immoral sexual rituals, mistreated the poor and needy, and ignored God’s requirements for righteousness.<\/p>\nFor centuries, the Israelites swung back and forth between worship of the Lord God and worship of Canaanite deities. Whenever they repented and returned to the Lord, he mercifully took them back into the covenant relationship. However, by the mid-700s BC<\/span>, the Israelites of the northern kingdom of Israel had become stubbornly resolute in their idol worship. So the Lord let the Assyrians destroy the kingdom and take many people into captivity.<\/p>\nAt the time of Jeremiah’s ministry, over one hundred years later, Judah was headed down the same road. Jeremiah likened this tragedy to the breakup of a marriage relationship, much as Hosea had pictured it earlier for Israel (Jer 2–3; cp. Hos 1–2). Israel’s bond with the Lord is portrayed as a marriage in which the bride forsook her husband and took up with other lovers. The Lord charged his people with violating the marriage bond and acting like a prostitute (Jer 3:1), and he warned them to return to him or face destruction. God could no longer say of the Israelites, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Jer 31:33; see also Exod 6:7; Hos 1:9).<\/p>\nJust as breaking the covenant had cost the northern kingdom its existence, so it later destroyed the kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem was torn apart, and the Temple was destroyed. This punishment cut deeply and painfully into God’s heart. The ever-merciful Lord promised a new covenant to replace the broken Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 6:7; Jer 2:1–3:10; 4:4; 22:8-9; 31:31-34; Ezek 16:1-63; Hos 2:2-13; 3:1; 4:1–5:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","summary_en":"The Broken Covenant A central issue in the Lord’s relationship with Israel was whether the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20–24), which the people had broken, was still valid. In the politics of the ancient Near East, covenantal agreements were common. When one of the partners in a covenant broke the terms of the agreement, the result was usually war. The Sinai covenant was unique because the Lord was one of the covenant partners. The covenant was patterned after secular covenants—it requir...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147156,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The New Covenant","title_en":"The New Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The New Covenant<\/h3>\nThe key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities.<\/p>\nThe new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hearts (Jer 31:33). The great liability of the old covenant was that it lacked the power to enable people to do what it commanded (see Rom 8:3). The new covenant would be internalized through the power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek 36:24-27). Thus, it would become possible for people everywhere (not just a select few) to fulfill God’s covenant plan for life as summed up in the two “Great Commandments” (Matt 22:35-40): “You must love the Lord<\/span> your God” (Deut 6:5) and “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev 19:18). The new covenant would achieve the goal that the old one pointed to but could not reach: creating new persons and a new community. The goal is a deep transformation of sinners, beginning with forgiveness of sins and culminating in a holiness exemplified by good works (Eph 1:4; 2:8-10).<\/p>\nJeremiah 30–33 stands out in its optimistic view of Israel’s future. The high point of this section (31:31-34) is the announcement that the Lord God will form a new covenant with his people. This passage in Jeremiah points toward Jesus of Nazareth, whose death would seal this new covenant. Jesus applied the new covenant to himself when he instituted the communion ritual (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; see also 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6). Jesus’ death made him the mediator of the covenant for whoever believes in him (Heb 8:8-12; ch 9). Christians commemorate that reality each time they participate in Communion. According to the New Testament, all believers in Jesus Christ will know him directly by the activity of the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling has been made possible through the sacrifice of Christ. They will know him personally and experience him powerfully, as only a few did in Old Testament times.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nIsa 11:1-9; 54:13-15; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:24-28; Matt 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; Rom 11:25-36; 1 Cor 11:23-26; 2 Cor 3:6-18; Heb 8:8–9:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","summary_en":"The New Covenant The key affirmation of the Sinai covenant was, “I will claim you as my own people, and I will be your God” (Exod 6:7; see Jer 31:33). The relationship between God and his people envisioned in the Sinai covenant was surrounded by laws chiseled in stone and a priestly class in charge of all religious institutions and activities. The new covenant would differ from the old in one primary way: It would no longer be external to the worshipers, but would now be written on their hear...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147492,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Knowing God","title_en":"Knowing God","content_ro":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","summary_en":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149675,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Limitations of Law","title_en":"The Limitations of Law","content_ro":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\nThe law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\nPaul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\nIf God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\nThe law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\nPaul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\nIf God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nDeut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","summary_en":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150205,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Law and the Spirit","title_en":"The Law and the Spirit","content_ro":"<h3>The Law and the Spirit<\/h3>\nAn enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification?<\/p>\nWhen the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). They knew from experience that the Holy Spirit has the power to make them new people, and Paul had taught them to rely on the Spirit to guide them.<\/p>\nShortly after Paul left Galatia, Jewish-Christian teachers arrived who taught the need to observe God’s law, both to be accepted by God and to be sanctified and become mature. They argued that Paul’s approach to sanctification by the Spirit would lead to lawlessness and sin.<\/p>\nPaul responded that, just as God counts<\/em> us as righteous by faith, so also he makes<\/em> us righteous by faith, through the working of the Spirit (Gal 5:16-26). Those who rely on the Spirit and follow his leading will not sin—God’s Spirit will never lead people to sin.<\/p>\nThe real problem is not a lack of understanding regarding right and wrong. Our God-given conscience tells us when we’re doing wrong, and God’s law makes the requirements of his righteousness even clearer (Rom 7:7-12). The real problem is that, by nature, our hearts are hard and sinful, and we lack the wisdom to know the right thing to do in a given situation. By nature, we are unable to apply God’s word in a way that is consistent with his intentions.<\/p>\nThe law cannot ameliorate our condition. But when the Holy Spirit guides and controls us, he changes our hearts to do the things that please God (Gal 5:22-23; Rom 8:5-14). God’s Spirit guides his people to fulfill his law in its true sense and intent. But fulfillment of the law must not be the goal or focus—the law is just our guardian (Gal 3:24-25). Instead, we focus on trusting God, relying on the Spirit, and loving others. God’s Spirit gives us the will and the power to do these things in a way that pleases God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nNum 11:16-17, 24-30; Jer 31:33-34; Ezek 36:26-27; Luke 24:49; Acts 5:32; Rom 7:1–8:17; 12:2; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:2-5; 5:5, 16-26; Heb 12:14-29<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Law and the Spirit<\/h3>\nAn enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification?<\/p>\nWhen the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). They knew from experience that the Holy Spirit has the power to make them new people, and Paul had taught them to rely on the Spirit to guide them.<\/p>\nShortly after Paul left Galatia, Jewish-Christian teachers arrived who taught the need to observe God’s law, both to be accepted by God and to be sanctified and become mature. They argued that Paul’s approach to sanctification by the Spirit would lead to lawlessness and sin.<\/p>\nPaul responded that, just as God counts<\/em> us as righteous by faith, so also he makes<\/em> us righteous by faith, through the working of the Spirit (Gal 5:16-26). Those who rely on the Spirit and follow his leading will not sin—God’s Spirit will never lead people to sin.<\/p>\nThe real problem is not a lack of understanding regarding right and wrong. Our God-given conscience tells us when we’re doing wrong, and God’s law makes the requirements of his righteousness even clearer (Rom 7:7-12). The real problem is that, by nature, our hearts are hard and sinful, and we lack the wisdom to know the right thing to do in a given situation. By nature, we are unable to apply God’s word in a way that is consistent with his intentions.<\/p>\nThe law cannot ameliorate our condition. But when the Holy Spirit guides and controls us, he changes our hearts to do the things that please God (Gal 5:22-23; Rom 8:5-14). God’s Spirit guides his people to fulfill his law in its true sense and intent. But fulfillment of the law must not be the goal or focus—the law is just our guardian (Gal 3:24-25). Instead, we focus on trusting God, relying on the Spirit, and loving others. God’s Spirit gives us the will and the power to do these things in a way that pleases God.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nNum 11:16-17, 24-30; Jer 31:33-34; Ezek 36:26-27; Luke 24:49; Acts 5:32; Rom 7:1–8:17; 12:2; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Gal 3:2-5; 5:5, 16-26; Heb 12:14-29<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Law and the Spirit An enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification? When the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). Th...","summary_en":"The Law and the Spirit An enduring question of the Christian faith is, Do Christians need to keep the Old Testament law in order to become mature followers of Christ? Does following God’s law provide sanctification? When the Christians in Galatia had received the Good News of salvation through faith in Christ, they had also received the Holy Spirit as the guarantee of their status as believers. Not only had God given his Spirit to them, but he had also worked miracles among them (Gal 3:5). Th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"34":[{"id":7887,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covenant","title_en":"Covenant","content_ro":"<h3>COVENANT<\/h3>\nArrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings.<\/p>\nThe covenant theme in the OT is developed from Noah to Abraham and reaches its first climax in the covenant formed between God and Israel at Mt Sinai. After King David’s time, the history of the covenant becomes a less prominent theme.<\/p>\nAt a low point in covenant history the Bible introduces the prophet Jeremiah’s prophecy of a “new covenant” in Israel’s future. Christians believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy eventually found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is not accidental that the two volumes of the Christian Bible have been called the Old Covenant and New Covenant (the word commonly translated “testament” means “covenant”).<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n• Human Covenants<\/p>\n• Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n• Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n• The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n• The Covenant with David<\/p>\n• The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\nThe essence of covenant is to be found in a particular kind of relationship between persons. Mutual obligations characterize that kind of relationship. Thus a covenant relationship is not merely a mutual acquaintance but a commitment to responsibility and action. A key word in Scripture to describe that commitment is “faithfulness,” acted out in a context of abiding friendship.<\/p>\nIn the OT the word “covenant” was used in an ordinary human sense as well as in a theological sense. An understanding of human covenants provides a starting point for understanding the covenant between God and human beings.<\/p>\nHuman Covenants<\/p>\nA variety of human relationships, from profoundly personal to distantly political, may be described as covenantal. The deep brotherly love that David and Jonathan shared led to a formal covenant between them (1 Sm 18:3). Their covenant of friendship was more than a token of esteem; it bound them to demonstrate mutual loyalty and loving-kindness in certain tangible ways. Jonathan’s covenant faithfulness was typified on an occasion when David was out of favor with the king; Jonathan braved his father’s wrath to speak favorably for his friend. Subsequently, he warned David secretly to flee into hiding (1 Sm 19–20).<\/p>\nTo appreciate the many OT laws on marriage and divorce, one must understand that marriage itself was a covenant relationship (Mal 2:14). The solemn promises exchanged by a man and woman became their covenant obligations. Faithfulness to those promises brought marital blessing (cf. Ps 128; Prv 18:22); violation brought a curse.<\/p>\nAn individual could, at least figuratively, make a covenant or vow with himself or herself (something like a New Year’s resolution). Job, arguing his integrity before God, referred to a covenant he had made with his eyes to keep him from looking at women licentiously (Jb 31:1).<\/p>\nCovenants could also have a national or international character. The elders of Israel made a national covenant with King David in Hebron (2 Sm 5:3). Probably it contained explicit promises both from the elders on behalf of the people to submit themselves to the king’s authority and from David to rule the nation justly and according to the law of God (Dt 17:15-20). The covenant relationship described mutual obligations between a senior partner (the king) and junior partners (the Israelites). In international relationships OT covenants were similar to modern treaties or alliances. King Solomon entered into such a covenant with Hiram, king of Tyre; that covenant, like many modern international treaties, was a trade agreement between the two nations (1 Kgs 5:12).<\/p>\nCovenant is thus an interpersonal framework of trust, responsibilities, and benefits, with broad application to almost every human relationship from personal friendship to international trade agreements. In Scripture covenant is also the most comprehensive concept covering an individual’s relationship to God.<\/p>\nDivine-Human Covenants<\/p>\nThe same basic characteristics of a strictly human covenant are present in a divine covenant: (1) a relationship between two parties (God and a human being or nation), and (2) mutual obligations between the covenant partners. To the OT believer, religion meant covenant. OT religion was faithfulness to the covenant relationship between God and his chosen people; religious responsibilities for both the faith and practice of Israel were covenant responsibilities.<\/p>\nThe concept of a divine-human covenant in the OT was not static. Although the fundamental character of covenant remains the same throughout the Bible, the specific nature and form of the covenant changed and developed in the course of ancient Israel’s history. A brief survey of covenant history will further clarify its dimensions.<\/p>\nBeginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<h5>Adam<\/h5>\nAdam and Eve were placed in the Garden. God was their Creator; they were his creatures. The meaning of their lives was to be found in relationship with each other and with God, the giver of the Garden. The fall, however, brought a disruption of the divine relationship, and they were expelled from the Garden.<\/p>\nThe fall substantially influenced the nature of subsequent religious covenants. The separation of humankind from God clarifies the nature of the human predicament. Created for a relationship with the Creator, sinning humans are excluded from that relationship and cannot, on their own accord, reestablish it. From that circumstance emerges a distinctive feature of divine-human covenants, namely, that God alone can initiate the relationship of covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>Noah<\/h5>\nThe first explicit mention of covenant in Scripture refers to the initiative taken by God to bind himself again to human beings in a covenant, despite human faithlessness. When God warned Noah to build an ark in order to escape the impending Flood, he also promised to establish a covenant with him (Gn 6:18). The corruption and violence of the human race had provoked God’s anger, but his grace was shown in his dealings with Noah. The promised covenant provided that God would maintain a relationship with one family, even though other divine-human relationships were being formally severed. Significantly, God’s covenant promise to Noah came in a context of demand: God ordered Noah to build an ark (v 14). Noah’s receipt of the covenant blessing depended on his obedience to a divine command.<\/p>\nThe covenant was elaborated only after the Flood, when Noah had made an offering to God (Gn 8:20-22). The covenant with Noah was in fact a universal covenant with humankind and all living creatures (9:8-10). God promised never to send such a flood again as judgment on the world. The sign of that covenant was the rainbow.<\/p>\nThe covenant with Noah affords some perspective for understanding the “covenant God.” Although human beings may deserve destruction because of their wickedness, God withholds that destruction. The covenant of Noah did not establish an intimate relationship between God and each living being; nevertheless, it left open the possibility of a more intimate covenant. Human beings, in spite of their evil, are allowed for a time to live in God’s world; during those years, they may seek a deeper relationship with that world’s Creator.<\/p>\n<h5>Abraham<\/h5>\nThe first explicit reference to God’s covenant with Abraham is in Genesis 15. When the Lord called the 75-year-old Abram (as he was first called) to leave his home city of Ur and set out on a journey, a relationship already existed between God and Abram. In that relationship, which enabled God to command Abram’s obedience, God made certain promises to him: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gn 12:2, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nFormal establishment of the covenant with Abram is described in Genesis 15 as a profound religious experience. The initiative lay entirely with God, who approached Abram in a vision and spoke with him. Abram raised a fundamental objection: how could he experience the blessing of God if it was to come to him through a son he did not have? His wife Sarai was past the childbearing age, and he himself was “as good as dead” (Rom 4:19). God assured the old man that he would have a son through whom his descendants would eventually be as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abram’s belief at that point introduced the theme of righteousness central to the covenant concept: Abram “believed the Lord<\/span>, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6, rsv<\/span>). At the end of that day, Abram knew that his own future and the future of his descendants were firmly in the hands of the covenant God. “On that day the Lord<\/span> made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I give this land’ ” (v 18, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe covenant is more fully expressed in Genesis 17, which probably records a renewal of God’s covenant with Abram. The initiative once again lay with God (Gn 17:1). God addressed the 99-year-old Abram in words that made clear that the covenant was not a relationship between equal partners. God was the Almighty; Abram was a human being to whom an extraordinary privilege had been granted.<\/p>\nYet the details of the covenant in Genesis 17 show that both partners assumed responsibilities. God committed himself voluntarily to Abram and his descendants while requiring certain commitments from Abram. The blessing Abram would receive as a covenant partner became clear from the new name God gave him. “I am changing your name. It will no longer be Abram; now you will be known as Abraham, for you will be the father of many nations” (Gn 17:5, nlt<\/span>). God would give to Abraham, through his descendants, the land of Canaan as an everlasting gift and would be the personal God of Abraham and his family in perpetuity (vv 7-8).<\/p>\nGod’s giving required a response of obedience from Abraham: “Live a blameless life” (Gn 17:1, nlt<\/span>). Those simple words indicate the essence of covenant relationship: to relate to God is to live in his presence; since God is holy, one who knows him is expected to live a life of integrity and blamelessness.<\/p>\nThe covenant also had a more formal aspect. Abraham and the male members of his household were to undergo the rite of circumcision as a symbol of covenant commitment. Abraham was an old man when he was circumcised (Gn 17:24), though male children born into the covenant family were to be circumcised when they were eight days old (v 12). Circumcision was not in itself a ritual peculiar to the Hebrews; it was practiced in most societies in the ancient Near East (the Philistines were one exception). The distinctiveness lay in what the act symbolized: among other things, a continuing and faithful relationship with the living God.<\/p>\nGod’s covenant with Abraham was characterized by both present and future realities. The covenant established a continuing relationship between Abraham and his Creator. Yet its thrust pointed to future blessing—in the children yet to be born, the “chosen people,” and in the land that eventually his descendants would call their own.<\/p>\nAnother dimension of the covenant lay still further in the future: “All the families of the earth will be blessed through you” (Gn 12:3, nlt<\/span>). Early in the OT, the idea of election (God’s unconditional preference; cf. 2 Thes 2:13) is present. God chose to enter into a covenant relationship with a particular man and his particular descendants. Yet God always elects a person to serve: Adam, to cultivate the Garden; Noah, to build an ark; Abraham, to leave his home for another land and to live blamelessly before God (cf. Eph 2:8-10). Further, the “particularity” of Abraham’s election contained within it a universality: through his descendants the blessing of God would be offered to all.<\/p>\nThus, the future aspects of Abraham’s covenant reflect two stages. From Abraham’s perspective, in the relatively near future his descendants would possess a land given them by God. But in the more distant future was the prospect of a universal blessing, the culmination of God’s work in the world. The initial fulfillment of that distant future is perceived in the NT, but the more immediate fulfillment of God’s promise was the Sinai covenant at the time of Moses.<\/p>\nThe Sinai Covenant<\/p>\nThe covenant established between God and Israel at Mt Sinai is the focal point of the covenant tradition in the OT. It was anticipated in the covenant of Abraham and lay behind the covenant of David and the proclamation of the prophets. It was central to OT religion, laying down the foundations of Judaism that continue into the modern world. The Sinai covenant was the formal institution of a relationship between God and his chosen people, Israel.<\/p>\nIn order to appreciate the impact of the Sinai covenant, one must understand its historical context. It was preceded by the exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. The exodus was an extraordinary act of liberation in which God intervened in the normal course of history to free his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus is interpreted in the OT as a divine act comparable to Creation, the act through which God “created” the nation of Israel. Examination of the two versions of the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15) shows that the exodus from Egypt directly parallels the creation of the world as a basis for Sabbath observance. Although Israel was created in the exodus, the nation had neither a constitution nor land. The covenant provided the nascent state of Israel with a constitution, making it a theocratic state (a state ruled by God).<\/p>\nThe basic account of the Sinai covenant is contained in Exodus 19 and 20. The initiative came from God, who gave instructions through Moses to prepare for the covenant; God spoke the words that contained the covenant offer. There was no doubt that the God of Israel was the senior partner in the relationship made formal at Sinai. The God who had revealed himself through his acts in the exodus then revealed himself in words. Those two aspects—the God who acts and speaks—are central to OT theology. And although the covenant contained law, it was preceded by the exodus, an act of divine grace.<\/p>\nGod’s offer of covenant carried with it a divine promise: “You will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:6, nlt<\/span>). The promise was one of extraordinary privilege; an entire nation was called upon to represent all other nations before the God of the universe. But the priestly office, though it carried privilege, was also a demanding office. A priest had to be pure and had to know the God whose presence he was required to enter. Thus Israel, the priestly nation, received a law that would provide direction in living, in loving God, and in serving all people. The law given with the covenant expressed the requirements for God’s covenant people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Covenant Law<\/h5>\nThe covenant law had two principal parts. First, the Ten Commandments expressed God’s requirements of Israel in a concise form (Ex 20:2-17). The commandments specified the covenant people’s relationship both to God and to other human beings. Although the tendency in the present day is to view the Ten Commandments as a system of ethics or morality, they had a different role in ancient Israel. The covenant law was the foundation or constitution of a new nation, a special “nation of priests.” The head of the nation-state was God. Hence, in ancient Israel the status of the Ten Commandments was approximately that of the code of criminal law in a modern nation-state. To break one of those laws was to commit a crime against God, the head of the state. Yet the laws had a positive purpose. They set down a way of life that would result in a full and rich communion with God and community with others.<\/p>\nThe second part of the covenant law was a detailed law code covering the activities of everyday life. Examples of such laws are found in Exodus 21–23. These laws were compiled and recorded in the “Book of the Covenant” (Ex 24:7). Although many laws were contained in this book, it was impossible to codify every aspect of human behavior. The diversity of the examples given indicates that for the covenant member no area of human life was beyond the influence of the covenant. Persons who entered into a relationship with God entered into a relationship that impinged on every possible aspect of their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Renewal<\/h5>\nThe covenant at Sinai was made with a particular group of people under the leadership of Moses but was binding on future generations. Consequently, the covenant was renewed from time to time. Covenant renewals are recorded in the time of Joshua (Jos 8:30-35; 24:1-28) and, much later, during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:1-3).<\/p>\nThe most important passage in the Bible for understanding covenant renewal and the nature of covenant is the book of Deuteronomy. The entire book describes a particular covenant renewal ceremony that occurred at a critical juncture in Israel’s early history. The Sinai covenant was renewed just before Moses’ death, before the transition of leadership to Joshua, and before a major military campaign to possess the Promised Land.<\/p>\nThe covenant since the time of Abraham had contained a promise of land. Immediately before they entered that land (c. 1250 BC<\/span>), the covenant vows were renewed with a new generation of Israelites, most of whom had not stood at the foot of Mt Sinai some 40 years earlier. Although covenant renewal is the central theme of Deuteronomy, the writer focused primarily on Moses’ sermon rather than on a detailed account of the renewal ceremony.<\/p>\nMany aspects of the ceremony were simply a repetition of what happened at the original ratification of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were repeated (Dt 5:6-21), and the laws of the Book of the Covenant were expounded in greater detail (Dt 12–26). Two points emerging in Deuteronomy are particularly significant for an understanding of covenant: a clear statement of covenant love and a detailed statement of the blessings and curses that accompanied the making and renewing of the covenant.<\/p>\nThe Covenant with David<\/p>\nThe covenant tradition underwent modification during the time of King David (c. 1000 BC<\/span>). The Sinai covenant had been established between God and Israel, with Moses acting as mediator. In David’s time an additional element was added: God entered into a covenant with David as king. That royal covenant was intimated to David through the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:8-16), indicating once again the divine initiative. It was to be an everlasting covenant with David’s royal lineage (23:5).<\/p>\n\nChristians generally interpret the covenant with David as a messianic covenant. For several centuries the dynasty established by David ruled a united Israel, then ruled the remaining southern kingdom of Judah. But in 586 BC<\/span> Judah was conquered by the Babylonians. At that point a descendant of David was no longer ruling an independent kingdom of God’s chosen people. The everlasting nature of the covenant with David was brought out, however, not in the pages of ancient history but in the expectation of a Messiah who would be born of David’s descendants. Matthew and Luke both pointed to Jesus’ Davidic descent (Mt 1:1; Lk 3:31). The NT thus extends the covenant acts of God into the new age in the person of Jesus.<\/p>\nThe New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\nAlthough David’s covenant with God was eternal, in a sense the covenant established with Israel on Mt Sinai was temporal. The Sinai covenant included conditional clauses, stated in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy. Israel’s disobedience of the covenant law would at worst bring exile from the Promised Land, a central covenant theme from Abraham to Moses and beyond.<\/p>\nThe Hebrew prophets often perceived the danger of an end to the covenant as a result of Israel’s sins. Some of the prophets, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, also perceived a deeper truth; namely, that the covenant was rooted in divine love and that therefore even the curse of God could not be final.<\/p>\nHosea dramatically expressed that truth through the “living parable” of his marriage (Hos 1–3). He married Gomer at God’s command, but later, as a result of her unfaithfulness, the marital covenant was dissolved by divorce. Although Gomer’s adulterous acts compelled Hosea to divorce her, he did not cease to love her. God later commanded Hosea to go back to Gomer (Hos 3:1). Despite her unfaithfulness, the prophet was to take her again into the covenant relationship of marriage. That acted-out parable depicted God’s actions with Israel. Israel’s sin would inevitably culminate in a divorce from God, but Hosea perceived a new marriage. In the new covenant between God and Israel, Israel would be graciously accepted back into a relationship with God (2:14-18).<\/p>\nThe new covenant is given powerful expression in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries BC<\/span>. In his lifetime Jeremiah saw the kingdom of Judah defeated in war. The nation lost its independence and became a vassal of the Babylonian Empire. In an external sense, that defeat in 586 BC<\/span> marked the end of the Sinai covenant. Israel could no longer call the Promised Land its own. Yet Jeremiah perceived a truth beyond the contemporary political realities. God’s work in the world, like his love for the world, was not over.<\/p>\nThus Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant that God would bring into effect: “The days are coming, says the Lord<\/span>, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31, rsv<\/span>). The new covenant would be marked by an act of God within human hearts, a radical spiritual transformation (Jer 31:34). At the Last Supper Jesus declared to his disciples that “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20, rsv<\/span>). To the writer of Hebrews, the new covenant was central to a full understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ (Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>\nConclusion<\/p>\nCovenant is a concept central to the message and the history of the OT. The covenant theme continues into the NT as a way of interpreting the Christian gospel. Meaning in human life is to be found in a covenant relationship with the living God. Yet sinful human beings cannot work their way into such a relationship; God alone can initiate it. According to the NT, God’s act in giving his son, Jesus, to die opened up the covenant relationship to all human beings. The forgiveness made available by Jesus’ “blood of the new covenant” makes it possible for any individual to enter into a covenant relationship with God. Entry into such a relationship, today as in Abraham’s time, hinges upon faith (Gal 3:6-14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Alliance; Covenant, The New; Law, Biblical Concept of; Oath; Vows.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVENANT<\/h3>\nArrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings.<\/p>\nThe covenant theme in the OT is developed from Noah to Abraham and reaches its first climax in the covenant formed between God and Israel at Mt Sinai. After King David’s time, the history of the covenant becomes a less prominent theme.<\/p>\nAt a low point in covenant history the Bible introduces the prophet Jeremiah’s prophecy of a “new covenant” in Israel’s future. Christians believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy eventually found fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is not accidental that the two volumes of the Christian Bible have been called the Old Covenant and New Covenant (the word commonly translated “testament” means “covenant”).<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• The Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\n• Human Covenants<\/p>\n• Divine-Human Covenants<\/p>\n• Beginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n• The Sinai Covenant<\/p>\n• The Covenant with David<\/p>\n• The New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe Meaning of Covenant<\/p>\nThe essence of covenant is to be found in a particular kind of relationship between persons. Mutual obligations characterize that kind of relationship. Thus a covenant relationship is not merely a mutual acquaintance but a commitment to responsibility and action. A key word in Scripture to describe that commitment is “faithfulness,” acted out in a context of abiding friendship.<\/p>\nIn the OT the word “covenant” was used in an ordinary human sense as well as in a theological sense. An understanding of human covenants provides a starting point for understanding the covenant between God and human beings.<\/p>\nHuman Covenants<\/p>\nA variety of human relationships, from profoundly personal to distantly political, may be described as covenantal. The deep brotherly love that David and Jonathan shared led to a formal covenant between them (1 Sm 18:3). Their covenant of friendship was more than a token of esteem; it bound them to demonstrate mutual loyalty and loving-kindness in certain tangible ways. Jonathan’s covenant faithfulness was typified on an occasion when David was out of favor with the king; Jonathan braved his father’s wrath to speak favorably for his friend. Subsequently, he warned David secretly to flee into hiding (1 Sm 19–20).<\/p>\nTo appreciate the many OT laws on marriage and divorce, one must understand that marriage itself was a covenant relationship (Mal 2:14). The solemn promises exchanged by a man and woman became their covenant obligations. Faithfulness to those promises brought marital blessing (cf. Ps 128; Prv 18:22); violation brought a curse.<\/p>\nAn individual could, at least figuratively, make a covenant or vow with himself or herself (something like a New Year’s resolution). Job, arguing his integrity before God, referred to a covenant he had made with his eyes to keep him from looking at women licentiously (Jb 31:1).<\/p>\nCovenants could also have a national or international character. The elders of Israel made a national covenant with King David in Hebron (2 Sm 5:3). Probably it contained explicit promises both from the elders on behalf of the people to submit themselves to the king’s authority and from David to rule the nation justly and according to the law of God (Dt 17:15-20). The covenant relationship described mutual obligations between a senior partner (the king) and junior partners (the Israelites). In international relationships OT covenants were similar to modern treaties or alliances. King Solomon entered into such a covenant with Hiram, king of Tyre; that covenant, like many modern international treaties, was a trade agreement between the two nations (1 Kgs 5:12).<\/p>\nCovenant is thus an interpersonal framework of trust, responsibilities, and benefits, with broad application to almost every human relationship from personal friendship to international trade agreements. In Scripture covenant is also the most comprehensive concept covering an individual’s relationship to God.<\/p>\nDivine-Human Covenants<\/p>\nThe same basic characteristics of a strictly human covenant are present in a divine covenant: (1) a relationship between two parties (God and a human being or nation), and (2) mutual obligations between the covenant partners. To the OT believer, religion meant covenant. OT religion was faithfulness to the covenant relationship between God and his chosen people; religious responsibilities for both the faith and practice of Israel were covenant responsibilities.<\/p>\nThe concept of a divine-human covenant in the OT was not static. Although the fundamental character of covenant remains the same throughout the Bible, the specific nature and form of the covenant changed and developed in the course of ancient Israel’s history. A brief survey of covenant history will further clarify its dimensions.<\/p>\nBeginnings of the Covenant Tradition<\/p>\n<h5>Adam<\/h5>\nAdam and Eve were placed in the Garden. God was their Creator; they were his creatures. The meaning of their lives was to be found in relationship with each other and with God, the giver of the Garden. The fall, however, brought a disruption of the divine relationship, and they were expelled from the Garden.<\/p>\nThe fall substantially influenced the nature of subsequent religious covenants. The separation of humankind from God clarifies the nature of the human predicament. Created for a relationship with the Creator, sinning humans are excluded from that relationship and cannot, on their own accord, reestablish it. From that circumstance emerges a distinctive feature of divine-human covenants, namely, that God alone can initiate the relationship of covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>Noah<\/h5>\nThe first explicit mention of covenant in Scripture refers to the initiative taken by God to bind himself again to human beings in a covenant, despite human faithlessness. When God warned Noah to build an ark in order to escape the impending Flood, he also promised to establish a covenant with him (Gn 6:18). The corruption and violence of the human race had provoked God’s anger, but his grace was shown in his dealings with Noah. The promised covenant provided that God would maintain a relationship with one family, even though other divine-human relationships were being formally severed. Significantly, God’s covenant promise to Noah came in a context of demand: God ordered Noah to build an ark (v 14). Noah’s receipt of the covenant blessing depended on his obedience to a divine command.<\/p>\nThe covenant was elaborated only after the Flood, when Noah had made an offering to God (Gn 8:20-22). The covenant with Noah was in fact a universal covenant with humankind and all living creatures (9:8-10). God promised never to send such a flood again as judgment on the world. The sign of that covenant was the rainbow.<\/p>\nThe covenant with Noah affords some perspective for understanding the “covenant God.” Although human beings may deserve destruction because of their wickedness, God withholds that destruction. The covenant of Noah did not establish an intimate relationship between God and each living being; nevertheless, it left open the possibility of a more intimate covenant. Human beings, in spite of their evil, are allowed for a time to live in God’s world; during those years, they may seek a deeper relationship with that world’s Creator.<\/p>\n<h5>Abraham<\/h5>\nThe first explicit reference to God’s covenant with Abraham is in Genesis 15. When the Lord called the 75-year-old Abram (as he was first called) to leave his home city of Ur and set out on a journey, a relationship already existed between God and Abram. In that relationship, which enabled God to command Abram’s obedience, God made certain promises to him: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gn 12:2, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nFormal establishment of the covenant with Abram is described in Genesis 15 as a profound religious experience. The initiative lay entirely with God, who approached Abram in a vision and spoke with him. Abram raised a fundamental objection: how could he experience the blessing of God if it was to come to him through a son he did not have? His wife Sarai was past the childbearing age, and he himself was “as good as dead” (Rom 4:19). God assured the old man that he would have a son through whom his descendants would eventually be as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abram’s belief at that point introduced the theme of righteousness central to the covenant concept: Abram “believed the Lord<\/span>, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6, rsv<\/span>). At the end of that day, Abram knew that his own future and the future of his descendants were firmly in the hands of the covenant God. “On that day the Lord<\/span> made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I give this land’ ” (v 18, rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe covenant is more fully expressed in Genesis 17, which probably records a renewal of God’s covenant with Abram. The initiative once again lay with God (Gn 17:1). God addressed the 99-year-old Abram in words that made clear that the covenant was not a relationship between equal partners. God was the Almighty; Abram was a human being to whom an extraordinary privilege had been granted.<\/p>\nYet the details of the covenant in Genesis 17 show that both partners assumed responsibilities. God committed himself voluntarily to Abram and his descendants while requiring certain commitments from Abram. The blessing Abram would receive as a covenant partner became clear from the new name God gave him. “I am changing your name. It will no longer be Abram; now you will be known as Abraham, for you will be the father of many nations” (Gn 17:5, nlt<\/span>). God would give to Abraham, through his descendants, the land of Canaan as an everlasting gift and would be the personal God of Abraham and his family in perpetuity (vv 7-8).<\/p>\nGod’s giving required a response of obedience from Abraham: “Live a blameless life” (Gn 17:1, nlt<\/span>). Those simple words indicate the essence of covenant relationship: to relate to God is to live in his presence; since God is holy, one who knows him is expected to live a life of integrity and blamelessness.<\/p>\nThe covenant also had a more formal aspect. Abraham and the male members of his household were to undergo the rite of circumcision as a symbol of covenant commitment. Abraham was an old man when he was circumcised (Gn 17:24), though male children born into the covenant family were to be circumcised when they were eight days old (v 12). Circumcision was not in itself a ritual peculiar to the Hebrews; it was practiced in most societies in the ancient Near East (the Philistines were one exception). The distinctiveness lay in what the act symbolized: among other things, a continuing and faithful relationship with the living God.<\/p>\nGod’s covenant with Abraham was characterized by both present and future realities. The covenant established a continuing relationship between Abraham and his Creator. Yet its thrust pointed to future blessing—in the children yet to be born, the “chosen people,” and in the land that eventually his descendants would call their own.<\/p>\nAnother dimension of the covenant lay still further in the future: “All the families of the earth will be blessed through you” (Gn 12:3, nlt<\/span>). Early in the OT, the idea of election (God’s unconditional preference; cf. 2 Thes 2:13) is present. God chose to enter into a covenant relationship with a particular man and his particular descendants. Yet God always elects a person to serve: Adam, to cultivate the Garden; Noah, to build an ark; Abraham, to leave his home for another land and to live blamelessly before God (cf. Eph 2:8-10). Further, the “particularity” of Abraham’s election contained within it a universality: through his descendants the blessing of God would be offered to all.<\/p>\nThus, the future aspects of Abraham’s covenant reflect two stages. From Abraham’s perspective, in the relatively near future his descendants would possess a land given them by God. But in the more distant future was the prospect of a universal blessing, the culmination of God’s work in the world. The initial fulfillment of that distant future is perceived in the NT, but the more immediate fulfillment of God’s promise was the Sinai covenant at the time of Moses.<\/p>\nThe Sinai Covenant<\/p>\nThe covenant established between God and Israel at Mt Sinai is the focal point of the covenant tradition in the OT. It was anticipated in the covenant of Abraham and lay behind the covenant of David and the proclamation of the prophets. It was central to OT religion, laying down the foundations of Judaism that continue into the modern world. The Sinai covenant was the formal institution of a relationship between God and his chosen people, Israel.<\/p>\nIn order to appreciate the impact of the Sinai covenant, one must understand its historical context. It was preceded by the exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt under the leadership of Moses. The exodus was an extraordinary act of liberation in which God intervened in the normal course of history to free his people from slavery in Egypt. The exodus is interpreted in the OT as a divine act comparable to Creation, the act through which God “created” the nation of Israel. Examination of the two versions of the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11; Dt 5:12-15) shows that the exodus from Egypt directly parallels the creation of the world as a basis for Sabbath observance. Although Israel was created in the exodus, the nation had neither a constitution nor land. The covenant provided the nascent state of Israel with a constitution, making it a theocratic state (a state ruled by God).<\/p>\nThe basic account of the Sinai covenant is contained in Exodus 19 and 20. The initiative came from God, who gave instructions through Moses to prepare for the covenant; God spoke the words that contained the covenant offer. There was no doubt that the God of Israel was the senior partner in the relationship made formal at Sinai. The God who had revealed himself through his acts in the exodus then revealed himself in words. Those two aspects—the God who acts and speaks—are central to OT theology. And although the covenant contained law, it was preceded by the exodus, an act of divine grace.<\/p>\nGod’s offer of covenant carried with it a divine promise: “You will be to me a kingdom of priests, my holy nation” (Ex 19:6, nlt<\/span>). The promise was one of extraordinary privilege; an entire nation was called upon to represent all other nations before the God of the universe. But the priestly office, though it carried privilege, was also a demanding office. A priest had to be pure and had to know the God whose presence he was required to enter. Thus Israel, the priestly nation, received a law that would provide direction in living, in loving God, and in serving all people. The law given with the covenant expressed the requirements for God’s covenant people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Covenant Law<\/h5>\nThe covenant law had two principal parts. First, the Ten Commandments expressed God’s requirements of Israel in a concise form (Ex 20:2-17). The commandments specified the covenant people’s relationship both to God and to other human beings. Although the tendency in the present day is to view the Ten Commandments as a system of ethics or morality, they had a different role in ancient Israel. The covenant law was the foundation or constitution of a new nation, a special “nation of priests.” The head of the nation-state was God. Hence, in ancient Israel the status of the Ten Commandments was approximately that of the code of criminal law in a modern nation-state. To break one of those laws was to commit a crime against God, the head of the state. Yet the laws had a positive purpose. They set down a way of life that would result in a full and rich communion with God and community with others.<\/p>\nThe second part of the covenant law was a detailed law code covering the activities of everyday life. Examples of such laws are found in Exodus 21–23. These laws were compiled and recorded in the “Book of the Covenant” (Ex 24:7). Although many laws were contained in this book, it was impossible to codify every aspect of human behavior. The diversity of the examples given indicates that for the covenant member no area of human life was beyond the influence of the covenant. Persons who entered into a relationship with God entered into a relationship that impinged on every possible aspect of their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Renewal<\/h5>\nThe covenant at Sinai was made with a particular group of people under the leadership of Moses but was binding on future generations. Consequently, the covenant was renewed from time to time. Covenant renewals are recorded in the time of Joshua (Jos 8:30-35; 24:1-28) and, much later, during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:1-3).<\/p>\nThe most important passage in the Bible for understanding covenant renewal and the nature of covenant is the book of Deuteronomy. The entire book describes a particular covenant renewal ceremony that occurred at a critical juncture in Israel’s early history. The Sinai covenant was renewed just before Moses’ death, before the transition of leadership to Joshua, and before a major military campaign to possess the Promised Land.<\/p>\nThe covenant since the time of Abraham had contained a promise of land. Immediately before they entered that land (c. 1250 BC<\/span>), the covenant vows were renewed with a new generation of Israelites, most of whom had not stood at the foot of Mt Sinai some 40 years earlier. Although covenant renewal is the central theme of Deuteronomy, the writer focused primarily on Moses’ sermon rather than on a detailed account of the renewal ceremony.<\/p>\nMany aspects of the ceremony were simply a repetition of what happened at the original ratification of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were repeated (Dt 5:6-21), and the laws of the Book of the Covenant were expounded in greater detail (Dt 12–26). Two points emerging in Deuteronomy are particularly significant for an understanding of covenant: a clear statement of covenant love and a detailed statement of the blessings and curses that accompanied the making and renewing of the covenant.<\/p>\nThe Covenant with David<\/p>\nThe covenant tradition underwent modification during the time of King David (c. 1000 BC<\/span>). The Sinai covenant had been established between God and Israel, with Moses acting as mediator. In David’s time an additional element was added: God entered into a covenant with David as king. That royal covenant was intimated to David through the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:8-16), indicating once again the divine initiative. It was to be an everlasting covenant with David’s royal lineage (23:5).<\/p>\n\nChristians generally interpret the covenant with David as a messianic covenant. For several centuries the dynasty established by David ruled a united Israel, then ruled the remaining southern kingdom of Judah. But in 586 BC<\/span> Judah was conquered by the Babylonians. At that point a descendant of David was no longer ruling an independent kingdom of God’s chosen people. The everlasting nature of the covenant with David was brought out, however, not in the pages of ancient history but in the expectation of a Messiah who would be born of David’s descendants. Matthew and Luke both pointed to Jesus’ Davidic descent (Mt 1:1; Lk 3:31). The NT thus extends the covenant acts of God into the new age in the person of Jesus.<\/p>\nThe New Covenant Predicted in the Old Testament<\/p>\nAlthough David’s covenant with God was eternal, in a sense the covenant established with Israel on Mt Sinai was temporal. The Sinai covenant included conditional clauses, stated in the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy. Israel’s disobedience of the covenant law would at worst bring exile from the Promised Land, a central covenant theme from Abraham to Moses and beyond.<\/p>\nThe Hebrew prophets often perceived the danger of an end to the covenant as a result of Israel’s sins. Some of the prophets, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, also perceived a deeper truth; namely, that the covenant was rooted in divine love and that therefore even the curse of God could not be final.<\/p>\nHosea dramatically expressed that truth through the “living parable” of his marriage (Hos 1–3). He married Gomer at God’s command, but later, as a result of her unfaithfulness, the marital covenant was dissolved by divorce. Although Gomer’s adulterous acts compelled Hosea to divorce her, he did not cease to love her. God later commanded Hosea to go back to Gomer (Hos 3:1). Despite her unfaithfulness, the prophet was to take her again into the covenant relationship of marriage. That acted-out parable depicted God’s actions with Israel. Israel’s sin would inevitably culminate in a divorce from God, but Hosea perceived a new marriage. In the new covenant between God and Israel, Israel would be graciously accepted back into a relationship with God (2:14-18).<\/p>\nThe new covenant is given powerful expression in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries BC<\/span>. In his lifetime Jeremiah saw the kingdom of Judah defeated in war. The nation lost its independence and became a vassal of the Babylonian Empire. In an external sense, that defeat in 586 BC<\/span> marked the end of the Sinai covenant. Israel could no longer call the Promised Land its own. Yet Jeremiah perceived a truth beyond the contemporary political realities. God’s work in the world, like his love for the world, was not over.<\/p>\nThus Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant that God would bring into effect: “The days are coming, says the Lord<\/span>, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31, rsv<\/span>). The new covenant would be marked by an act of God within human hearts, a radical spiritual transformation (Jer 31:34). At the Last Supper Jesus declared to his disciples that “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood” (Lk 22:20, rsv<\/span>). To the writer of Hebrews, the new covenant was central to a full understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ (Heb 8:8-12).<\/p>\nConclusion<\/p>\nCovenant is a concept central to the message and the history of the OT. The covenant theme continues into the NT as a way of interpreting the Christian gospel. Meaning in human life is to be found in a covenant relationship with the living God. Yet sinful human beings cannot work their way into such a relationship; God alone can initiate it. According to the NT, God’s act in giving his son, Jesus, to die opened up the covenant relationship to all human beings. The forgiveness made available by Jesus’ “blood of the new covenant” makes it possible for any individual to enter into a covenant relationship with God. Entry into such a relationship, today as in Abraham’s time, hinges upon faith (Gal 3:6-14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Alliance; Covenant, The New; Law, Biblical Concept of; Oath; Vows.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVENANT Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings. The covenant theme in the OT is developed from...","summary_en":"COVENANT Arrangement between two parties involving mutual obligations; especially the arrangement that established the relationship between God and his people, expressed in grace first with Israel and then with the church. Through that covenant God has conveyed to humanity the meaning of human life and salvation. Covenant is one of the central themes of the Bible, where some covenants are between human beings, others between God and human beings. The covenant theme in the OT is developed from...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7912,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Covenant, the New","title_en":"Covenant, the New","content_ro":"<h3>COVENANT, The New<\/h3>\nA gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT.<\/p>\nAlthough the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremiah saw God making with Israel “after those days” (vv 32-34) with the covenant God had made with his people in the days of Moses. The contrast is seen, first of all, in the internal nature of the new covenant. Whereas the old covenant was written on tablets of stone (Ex 31:18; 34:27-32; Dt 4:13; 5:22; 9:11; 10:3-4) and in a book (Ex 24:7; cf. the phrase “old written code,” Rom 7:6, rsv<\/span>), the new covenant is to be written on the human heart. One result is a clearer revelation of what God demands; another is the enablement of believers to fulfill those demands (see Rom 8:2-4). The interior nature of the new covenant is spoken of in several other passages (Ez 11:19-21; 36:26-27) and made explicit in the prophet Joel of a time when God “will pour out [his] spirit on all flesh” (Jl 2:28-32).<\/p>\nA second contrast is in the way God’s people know him under the two covenants. There is no doubt that Israel under the old covenant “knew” God; God had revealed himself, though at times the nation tended to forget this (Jgs 2:10; Hos 4:1, 6). What the prophets envisioned in the new covenant is a unique personal knowledge of God by each individual member of the covenant community.<\/p>\nFinally, the two covenants differ in regard to God’s dealing with human sin. Jeremiah promised that God would forgive the iniquity of his people and blot out their sin. Israel already knew that God delighted in mercy and forgiveness (Ex 34:6-7), but Jeremiah was saying that God would never again remember their sin (Jer 31:34). Under the old covenant there was a reminder of sin year after year (Heb 10:3); under the new covenant no remembrance of sin remains (v 14).<\/p>\nA New Covenant<\/p>\nThe expression “new covenant” is found at least six times in the NT (1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:8, 13; 9:15; 12:24; and probably Lk 22:20, according to some manuscripts). In certain Greek manuscripts the phrase is also found in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, where “new” seems to have been added by various scribes to “blood of the covenant,” in order to make these accounts conform to parallel accounts of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians or possibly in Luke.<\/p>\nEven though the term “new” is not found in the accounts in Matthew and Mark in the best Greek manuscripts, and was therefore probably not part of the original text, it is clear from all four accounts that Jesus saw the Lord’s Supper as instituting a different and therefore “new” covenant. The covenant was being sealed by his sacrificial death, that is, by his blood, just as the Mosaic covenant was sealed by the “blood of the covenant” (Ex 24:6-8). The cup of the Lord’s Supper symbolizes the blood of Christ’s sacrifice, sealing the new covenant God has at last made with his people. The new covenant, ratified by Christ’s death, is what the church therefore commemorates each time it celebrates the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\nIn his institution of the Lord’s Supper, Jesus did not elucidate what the “newness” of the covenant entailed. Elsewhere he mentioned a “baptism with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5; 11:16; cf. Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; and Jn 1:33, where this promise is found on the lips of John the Baptist; cf. also 1 Cor 12:13). Yet both OT prophecies refer to the same new covenant that God would establish in the future, as shown in 2 Corinthians 3:6. There the apostle Paul stated that God “has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant” (rsv<\/span>; cf. Jer 31:31), not “in a written code but in the Spirit” (rsv<\/span>; cf. Jl 2:28-32), for “the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life” (rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nSuperiority of the New Covenant<\/p>\nIn 2 Corinthians 3, Paul was showing that in contrast to the old (Mosaic) covenant (v 14), which was a dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone (v 7), the new covenant instituted by Jesus is one of far greater splendor (vv 8-9), written on the human heart by the Spirit of the living God himself (v 3).<\/p>\nThe new covenant concept is treated most exhaustively and systematically in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews 8:8-12 the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the longest OT quotation found in the NT. In Hebrews 12:24 a different Greek word for “new” is used, but the meaning remains the same. The theme of the new covenant dominates the book of Hebrews, which was written to encourage faltering Christians by demonstrating the superiority of the Christian faith over their old Jewish beliefs and practices. In Hebrews the new covenant is seen as better than the old “obsolete” covenant in a number of ways.<\/p>\n1. The new covenant has a better priesthood than the old covenant, since there is no longer any need for a continual change of priests due to death (Heb 7:23). One continual priest now lives forever to make intercession before God on behalf of his people (vv 24-25).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new covenant priest is better than those of the old covenant, since Jesus does not have to offer sacrifices continually for his own sins and then for the sins of his people. He has instead made one complete and perfect offering (7:27; 9:25-28; 10:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new covenant has a better sacrifice than the old covenant; what the blood of bulls and goats could not do, since the atonement they brought could at best be only partial (10:2-3), the blood of Christ has done once for all (9:11-14; 10:1-10).<\/li>\n<li>4. The new covenant is built on “better promises” than the old (8:6).<\/li>\n<li>5. Whereas the old covenant was imperfect (8:7) and thus became obsolete (8:13), the new covenant is perfect and eternal (13:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Whereas the old covenant provided a believer with no direct access to God (9:6-8), the new covenant provides a direct access to God that can purify and perfect the believer’s conscience (cf. 9:14 with 9:9).<\/li>\n<li>7. The new covenant possesses a better “surety,” or guarantee, an oath sworn by God himself (7:20-22).<\/li>\n<li>8. The new covenant assures the presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of each believer. The new covenant community has been touched by the promised Spirit (6:4), who, according to Paul, is both the seal and guarantee of their inheritance (see 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14).<\/li>\nConclusion<\/p>\nThe new covenant and its accompanying new commandment are both fulfillments of what was implicit in the old. The new covenant is written on the heart of each member of the new covenant community by the Holy Spirit. The power of God’s Spirit within, enabling the believer to carry out the new commandment (Rom 8:2-4; Gal 5:16-25), is a distinctive feature of the new covenant.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Covenant.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COVENANT, The New<\/h3>\nA gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT.<\/p>\nAlthough the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremiah saw God making with Israel “after those days” (vv 32-34) with the covenant God had made with his people in the days of Moses. The contrast is seen, first of all, in the internal nature of the new covenant. Whereas the old covenant was written on tablets of stone (Ex 31:18; 34:27-32; Dt 4:13; 5:22; 9:11; 10:3-4) and in a book (Ex 24:7; cf. the phrase “old written code,” Rom 7:6, rsv<\/span>), the new covenant is to be written on the human heart. One result is a clearer revelation of what God demands; another is the enablement of believers to fulfill those demands (see Rom 8:2-4). The interior nature of the new covenant is spoken of in several other passages (Ez 11:19-21; 36:26-27) and made explicit in the prophet Joel of a time when God “will pour out [his] spirit on all flesh” (Jl 2:28-32).<\/p>\nA second contrast is in the way God’s people know him under the two covenants. There is no doubt that Israel under the old covenant “knew” God; God had revealed himself, though at times the nation tended to forget this (Jgs 2:10; Hos 4:1, 6). What the prophets envisioned in the new covenant is a unique personal knowledge of God by each individual member of the covenant community.<\/p>\nFinally, the two covenants differ in regard to God’s dealing with human sin. Jeremiah promised that God would forgive the iniquity of his people and blot out their sin. Israel already knew that God delighted in mercy and forgiveness (Ex 34:6-7), but Jeremiah was saying that God would never again remember their sin (Jer 31:34). Under the old covenant there was a reminder of sin year after year (Heb 10:3); under the new covenant no remembrance of sin remains (v 14).<\/p>\nA New Covenant<\/p>\nThe expression “new covenant” is found at least six times in the NT (1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:8, 13; 9:15; 12:24; and probably Lk 22:20, according to some manuscripts). In certain Greek manuscripts the phrase is also found in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, where “new” seems to have been added by various scribes to “blood of the covenant,” in order to make these accounts conform to parallel accounts of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians or possibly in Luke.<\/p>\nEven though the term “new” is not found in the accounts in Matthew and Mark in the best Greek manuscripts, and was therefore probably not part of the original text, it is clear from all four accounts that Jesus saw the Lord’s Supper as instituting a different and therefore “new” covenant. The covenant was being sealed by his sacrificial death, that is, by his blood, just as the Mosaic covenant was sealed by the “blood of the covenant” (Ex 24:6-8). The cup of the Lord’s Supper symbolizes the blood of Christ’s sacrifice, sealing the new covenant God has at last made with his people. The new covenant, ratified by Christ’s death, is what the church therefore commemorates each time it celebrates the Lord’s Supper.<\/p>\nIn his institution of the Lord’s Supper, Jesus did not elucidate what the “newness” of the covenant entailed. Elsewhere he mentioned a “baptism with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5; 11:16; cf. Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; and Jn 1:33, where this promise is found on the lips of John the Baptist; cf. also 1 Cor 12:13). Yet both OT prophecies refer to the same new covenant that God would establish in the future, as shown in 2 Corinthians 3:6. There the apostle Paul stated that God “has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant” (rsv<\/span>; cf. Jer 31:31), not “in a written code but in the Spirit” (rsv<\/span>; cf. Jl 2:28-32), for “the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life” (rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\nSuperiority of the New Covenant<\/p>\nIn 2 Corinthians 3, Paul was showing that in contrast to the old (Mosaic) covenant (v 14), which was a dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone (v 7), the new covenant instituted by Jesus is one of far greater splendor (vv 8-9), written on the human heart by the Spirit of the living God himself (v 3).<\/p>\nThe new covenant concept is treated most exhaustively and systematically in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews 8:8-12 the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the longest OT quotation found in the NT. In Hebrews 12:24 a different Greek word for “new” is used, but the meaning remains the same. The theme of the new covenant dominates the book of Hebrews, which was written to encourage faltering Christians by demonstrating the superiority of the Christian faith over their old Jewish beliefs and practices. In Hebrews the new covenant is seen as better than the old “obsolete” covenant in a number of ways.<\/p>\n1. The new covenant has a better priesthood than the old covenant, since there is no longer any need for a continual change of priests due to death (Heb 7:23). One continual priest now lives forever to make intercession before God on behalf of his people (vv 24-25).<\/p>\n<li>2. The new covenant priest is better than those of the old covenant, since Jesus does not have to offer sacrifices continually for his own sins and then for the sins of his people. He has instead made one complete and perfect offering (7:27; 9:25-28; 10:12).<\/li>\n<li>3. The new covenant has a better sacrifice than the old covenant; what the blood of bulls and goats could not do, since the atonement they brought could at best be only partial (10:2-3), the blood of Christ has done once for all (9:11-14; 10:1-10).<\/li>\n<li>4. The new covenant is built on “better promises” than the old (8:6).<\/li>\n<li>5. Whereas the old covenant was imperfect (8:7) and thus became obsolete (8:13), the new covenant is perfect and eternal (13:20).<\/li>\n<li>6. Whereas the old covenant provided a believer with no direct access to God (9:6-8), the new covenant provides a direct access to God that can purify and perfect the believer’s conscience (cf. 9:14 with 9:9).<\/li>\n<li>7. The new covenant possesses a better “surety,” or guarantee, an oath sworn by God himself (7:20-22).<\/li>\n<li>8. The new covenant assures the presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of each believer. The new covenant community has been touched by the promised Spirit (6:4), who, according to Paul, is both the seal and guarantee of their inheritance (see 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14).<\/li>\nConclusion<\/p>\nThe new covenant and its accompanying new commandment are both fulfillments of what was implicit in the old. The new covenant is written on the heart of each member of the new covenant community by the Holy Spirit. The power of God’s Spirit within, enabling the believer to carry out the new commandment (Rom 8:2-4; Gal 5:16-25), is a distinctive feature of the new covenant.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Covenant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COVENANT, The New A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT. Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremi...","summary_en":"COVENANT, The New A gracious provision of God given through Jesus Christ for the redemption of fallen humanity—replacing and fulfilling the old covenant, which was expressed primarily through the Mosaic law. The expression “new covenant” is found principally in the NT. Although the concept of a new covenant is found in several places in the OT (Ez 34:23-31; 37:24-28; Jl 2:12-32), the actual phrase occurs only once (Jer 31:31-34). That passage contrasts the new covenant that the prophet Jeremi...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11214,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Eternal Life","title_en":"Eternal Life","content_ro":"<h3>ETERNAL LIFE<\/h3>\nMode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides the most definitive material on eternal life.<\/p>\nThe phrase “eternal life” occurs only once in the Greek version of the OT (Dn 12:2, with the basic meaning of “the life of the age,” designating the life of the age beyond the resurrection from the dead). The primary meaning of “life” in the OT, however, is the quality of well-being in earthly existence.<\/p>\nIn the intertestamental period, the rabbinic distinction between “this age” and “the age which is to come” emphasized that the concept of life in the new age consists of a qualitative, rather than simply a quantitative, distinction from the present age.<\/p>\nThe Greek word translated “eternal” is derived from the word for “age” or “eon.” The setting of the NT within the context of Judaism, with its concept of a living God and the consequent promise of “the age which is to come,” gives depth and color to the meaning of the adjective “eternal.” Jesus Christ’s coming as God’s definitive revelation brings the possibility of the qualities of life in the future messianic age into present reality.<\/p>\nThe rich young ruler came to Jesus and asked for directions on how to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). He was obviously thinking of resurrection in the age to come. Jesus answered in the same terms (v 30).<\/p>\nIn his response to the rich young ruler, Jesus equated the reception of eternal life with entrance into the kingdom of God (Mk 10:23-25). The kingdom of God is not simply a future event but is already inaugurated in Jesus’ life, ministry, and teachings. The kingdom is a gift of life available while the follower still lives within the present age. Many of Jesus’ parables emphasize this point (e.g., those in Mt 13). The Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount (5:3-12) reinforce the concept of a present blessedness that includes salvation, forgiveness, and righteousness. Thus eternal life is a present blessing available to those who submit to God’s reign and are enjoying the blessing of this new era of salvation before the final consummation at the present age’s end.<\/p>\nThe definitive discussion of eternal life comes from John’s Gospel. John’s purpose delineates the crucial significance of the concept: “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:31, rsv<\/span>). The earliest Johannine reference to eternal life is found in John 3:15.<\/p>\nJohn clearly shared in the Jewish expectation of the age to come with its anticipated blessings (e.g., Jn 3:36; 4:14; 5:29, 39; 6:27; 12:25). Eternal life is defined by the special gifts of the messianic age when it arrives at consummation. Lazarus’s resurrection (ch 11) was a living parable demonstrating the future life available to those who trust in Christ. Martha, before her brother’s actual resurrection, asserted her belief that Lazarus would be raised on the last day (v 24). Jesus responded that he himself is the resurrection and the life, and that those who believe in him will never die, even if they die physically (vv 25-26).<\/p>\nThe central emphasis of John’s Gospel, however, does not lie in the anticipated future but in the present experience of that future life. The life of the age to come is already available in Christ to the believer. The metaphors with which Jesus defined his own mission emphasize the present new life: living water that is a spring of water welling up to eternal life (Jn 4:10-14); living bread that satisfies the world’s spiritual hunger (6:35-40); the light of the world who leads his followers into the light of life (8:12); the good shepherd who brings abundant life (10:10); the life giver who raises the dead (11:25); the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); and the genuine vine who sustains those who abide in him (15:5).<\/p>\nJesus was very careful to note that the accomplishment of his mission did not rest in his own nature and ability but in the Father who sent him. Jesus’ submission to the Father highlights again the fact that life is a gift of God. Those who believe in the Son of God are recipients of the life that God alone gives—eternal life. Thus the promise of resurrection for all believers, made explicit in Lazarus’s resurrection and guaranteed in Christ’s resurrection as the “firstfruits” (in Pauline terminology, kjv<\/span> 1 Cor 15:23), is the natural consequence of God’s gift (Jn 5:26-29).<\/p>\nJesus added further content to the concept of eternal life by connecting it with knowing the true God (Jn 17:3). In Greek thought, knowledge referred to the result of either contemplation or mystical ecstasy. In the OT, however, knowledge meant experience, relationship, fellowship, and concern (cf. Jer 31:34). This connotation of knowledge as intimate relationship is underlined by the usage of the verb form to designate sexual relations between male and female (cf. Gn 4:1). Jesus stated, “I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father” (Jn 10:14-15, rsv<\/span>). The intimate and mutual relationship of Father and Son is the model for the relationship of the Son and his disciples. This knowledge does not come by education or manipulation of the mind but by revelation through the Son (1:18; cf. 14:7).<\/p>\nA brief survey of the primary elements in the concept of eternal life clearly shows that it is not simply an endless or everlasting life. Although there are no final boundaries to eternal life, the Bible’s primary emphasis is on the quality of life, especially its divine elements. Eternal life is the importation of the qualities of the age to come into the present through the revelation of a faithful God in Christ, and it brings knowledge of God’s relationship with him.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Life; New Creation, New Creature; Regeneration.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ETERNAL LIFE<\/h3>\nMode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides the most definitive material on eternal life.<\/p>\nThe phrase “eternal life” occurs only once in the Greek version of the OT (Dn 12:2, with the basic meaning of “the life of the age,” designating the life of the age beyond the resurrection from the dead). The primary meaning of “life” in the OT, however, is the quality of well-being in earthly existence.<\/p>\nIn the intertestamental period, the rabbinic distinction between “this age” and “the age which is to come” emphasized that the concept of life in the new age consists of a qualitative, rather than simply a quantitative, distinction from the present age.<\/p>\nThe Greek word translated “eternal” is derived from the word for “age” or “eon.” The setting of the NT within the context of Judaism, with its concept of a living God and the consequent promise of “the age which is to come,” gives depth and color to the meaning of the adjective “eternal.” Jesus Christ’s coming as God’s definitive revelation brings the possibility of the qualities of life in the future messianic age into present reality.<\/p>\nThe rich young ruler came to Jesus and asked for directions on how to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). He was obviously thinking of resurrection in the age to come. Jesus answered in the same terms (v 30).<\/p>\nIn his response to the rich young ruler, Jesus equated the reception of eternal life with entrance into the kingdom of God (Mk 10:23-25). The kingdom of God is not simply a future event but is already inaugurated in Jesus’ life, ministry, and teachings. The kingdom is a gift of life available while the follower still lives within the present age. Many of Jesus’ parables emphasize this point (e.g., those in Mt 13). The Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount (5:3-12) reinforce the concept of a present blessedness that includes salvation, forgiveness, and righteousness. Thus eternal life is a present blessing available to those who submit to God’s reign and are enjoying the blessing of this new era of salvation before the final consummation at the present age’s end.<\/p>\nThe definitive discussion of eternal life comes from John’s Gospel. John’s purpose delineates the crucial significance of the concept: “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:31, rsv<\/span>). The earliest Johannine reference to eternal life is found in John 3:15.<\/p>\nJohn clearly shared in the Jewish expectation of the age to come with its anticipated blessings (e.g., Jn 3:36; 4:14; 5:29, 39; 6:27; 12:25). Eternal life is defined by the special gifts of the messianic age when it arrives at consummation. Lazarus’s resurrection (ch 11) was a living parable demonstrating the future life available to those who trust in Christ. Martha, before her brother’s actual resurrection, asserted her belief that Lazarus would be raised on the last day (v 24). Jesus responded that he himself is the resurrection and the life, and that those who believe in him will never die, even if they die physically (vv 25-26).<\/p>\nThe central emphasis of John’s Gospel, however, does not lie in the anticipated future but in the present experience of that future life. The life of the age to come is already available in Christ to the believer. The metaphors with which Jesus defined his own mission emphasize the present new life: living water that is a spring of water welling up to eternal life (Jn 4:10-14); living bread that satisfies the world’s spiritual hunger (6:35-40); the light of the world who leads his followers into the light of life (8:12); the good shepherd who brings abundant life (10:10); the life giver who raises the dead (11:25); the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); and the genuine vine who sustains those who abide in him (15:5).<\/p>\nJesus was very careful to note that the accomplishment of his mission did not rest in his own nature and ability but in the Father who sent him. Jesus’ submission to the Father highlights again the fact that life is a gift of God. Those who believe in the Son of God are recipients of the life that God alone gives—eternal life. Thus the promise of resurrection for all believers, made explicit in Lazarus’s resurrection and guaranteed in Christ’s resurrection as the “firstfruits” (in Pauline terminology, kjv<\/span> 1 Cor 15:23), is the natural consequence of God’s gift (Jn 5:26-29).<\/p>\nJesus added further content to the concept of eternal life by connecting it with knowing the true God (Jn 17:3). In Greek thought, knowledge referred to the result of either contemplation or mystical ecstasy. In the OT, however, knowledge meant experience, relationship, fellowship, and concern (cf. Jer 31:34). This connotation of knowledge as intimate relationship is underlined by the usage of the verb form to designate sexual relations between male and female (cf. Gn 4:1). Jesus stated, “I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father” (Jn 10:14-15, rsv<\/span>). The intimate and mutual relationship of Father and Son is the model for the relationship of the Son and his disciples. This knowledge does not come by education or manipulation of the mind but by revelation through the Son (1:18; cf. 14:7).<\/p>\nA brief survey of the primary elements in the concept of eternal life clearly shows that it is not simply an endless or everlasting life. Although there are no final boundaries to eternal life, the Bible’s primary emphasis is on the quality of life, especially its divine elements. Eternal life is the importation of the qualities of the age to come into the present through the revelation of a faithful God in Christ, and it brings knowledge of God’s relationship with him.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Life; New Creation, New Creature; Regeneration.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ETERNAL LIFE Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides th...","summary_en":"ETERNAL LIFE Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides th...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12735,"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},{"id":27282,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Neighbor","title_en":"Neighbor","content_ro":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\nConcept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament<\/p>\nAlthough it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\nWithin the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\nThe grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\nThe importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\nIn Late Judaism<\/p>\nFrom the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament<\/p>\nJesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\nOn another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\nThe debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\nIn order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\nEnter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\nThe parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\nThe forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NEIGHBOR<\/h3>\nConcept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life.<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament<\/p>\nAlthough it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded to “love your neighbor as yourself.” In 19:34, it is explicitly stated that such love should also be shown to the foreigner (or “sojourner”) passing through the land. If “neighbor” (v 18) implied a more encompassing notion, such as “mankind” or “fellow man,” there presumably would have been no need to include the further stipulation in verse 34. “Neighbor” was therefore probably taken to mean one’s immediate neighbor, the fellow Israelite.<\/p>\nWithin the covenant community, love of neighbor involved certain responsibilities explicitly set forth in the law. The neighbor was to be treated fairly (Ex 22:5-15; Lv 6:2-7; 19:9-18) and respected (Ex 20:16), as were his belongings (Ex 20:17). To foster such just and merciful relationships within the covenant community, the neighbor was to be thought of as a “brother” (Lv 25:25; Dt 22:1-4). What one did to one’s neighbor was to be returned in kind (Lv 24:19-23; Dt 19:11-19).<\/p>\nThe grave importance attached to treatment of the neighbor is understandable when seen as part of one’s wider relationship with God and was considered something that could affect significantly the divine-human relationship (Lv 6:1-7; 19; 25:17; Dt 24:10-13; Ps 12). Israelites were to treat their neighbors in the same loving way they had themselves been treated by God (Ex 22:21; Lv 25:35-38).<\/p>\nThe importance of the neighbor relationship within the covenant community is also demonstrated by the fact that when such responsibilities were ignored, a societal breakdown or national turmoil followed (Dt 28:15-68; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7). That the Israelites often did neglect love for neighbor, particularly the neighbor in need, is a contributing cause for the divine punishment of the exile (Jer 5:7-9; 7:1-15; 9:2-9; Hos 4:1-3; Am 2:6-7; 5:10-13; 8:4-6). The mere fact that proper love of neighbor was also part of Israel’s hope for the messianic age to come (Jer 31:34; Zec 3:10) also points to its common neglect within the OT covenant community.<\/p>\nIn Late Judaism<\/p>\nFrom the exilic experience, Israel recognized that divine blessing was conditional somewhat on justice and love exercised toward one another (Zec 8:14-17). The identity of the “neighbor” was debatable, however. Several factors suggest that “neighbor” was limited in this period to the fellow Israelite and the proselyte (gentile convert to Judaism). Evidence from rabbinic material excludes Samaritans and the Gentiles living in the land from being considered “neighbors” and thus worthy of love. Within the Jewish Essene community at Qumran, the “neighbor” to be respected and treated fairly was restricted to one’s fellow community members. Finally, when Jesus recalls, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’” (Mt 5:43), he is quoting only partially from the OT (Lv 19:18—“You shall love your neighbor”). The last phrase (“and hate your enemy”) reflects the contemporary Jewish feeling toward outsiders; that is, God did not require love toward those considered “enemies” but only toward fellow countrymen.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament<\/p>\nJesus differed dramatically from his Jewish contemporaries by eradicating the limitations on the neighbor to be loved. In contrast to those who would limit love to one’s fellow countrymen, Jesus advocated extending the obligation reserved for the neighbor to the enemy as well (Mt 5:43-48), and in so doing, he destroyed the distinction between neighbor and enemy altogether.<\/p>\nOn another occasion, a scribe asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment given by God (Mk 12:28-31). In response, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:5 concerning the nature of God and man’s obligation to love God with his entire being: heart, soul, and mind. Of significance is that Jesus did not stop there but linked with this a second commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18). Some scholars suggest that this dramatic and close association of love of God and love of neighbor originated with Jesus. If Jesus was the first to tie these commands together (see Mt 22:37; Mk 12:29-31), it reveals our Lord’s own understanding of the relation of these two obligations; proper love for neighbor derives from love for God, and conversely, love for God is inseparable from meeting the needs of a neighbor in love.<\/p>\nThe debate in Jesus’ time was not over how to properly treat a neighbor but who, in fact, was the neighbor. Jesus is asked this very question by an expert of the law (Lk 10:29). Jesus had complimented the lawyer for his clear understanding of what was required to inherit eternal life, namely, love of God and love of neighbor. Luke suggests that the lawyer asked the further qualifying question in order to “justify himself,” that is, justify his actual behavior of limited love toward his fellow man. Jesus chose not to respond directly but through the use of a parable, in this case, the familiar parable of the Good Samaritan (vv 30-35).<\/p>\nIn order to open the lawyer’s eyes to the tragic shortsightedness of his question, Jesus related an everyday story of a man traveling the treacherous road from Jerusalem down to Jericho, a road particularly plagued by robbers. The traveler is robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half dead. To this point, the lawyer might have assumed Jesus was offering an example of who constitutes a “neighbor”—a fellow Jew in need. Jesus proceeds, however, to introduce two figures, a priest and a Levite who, in an academic discussion, could have argued quite ably on who is the neighbor God calls one to love. The lawyer would no doubt have anticipated such experts in the law to act rightly toward the victim. In contrast, the priest and Levite, upon seeing the man in need, respond by “passing by on the other side.” Unable to determine whether the victim was dead or barely alive, and possibly not wanting to risk uncleanness, the experts of the law pass by, thus violating the greatest of the commandments just identified by the lawyer (10:25-28).<\/p>\nEnter a Samaritan—a figure especially despised by the Jews. Viewed as heretics by the Jewish religious authorities, the Samaritans were disqualified in rabbinic circles from being considered a “neighbor” and thus worthy of love. In fact, previous centuries had witnessed the slaughter of many Samaritans by Jewish rulers, and animosity clearly existed between the two peoples (see Jn 4:9). While the lawyer listening to the parable would have expected the priest and Levite to act justly toward the victim, he must have been surprised that a hated Samaritan would show compassion and thus fulfill the greatest commandment. Jesus intentionally spelled out the extent of the Samaritan’s compassion (immediate care in dressing wounds, transport to the inn, care for the victim there and extended care in paying for care by others while he is away, Lk 10:34-35) to such a degree that the lawyer would have no doubt as to the genuineness of the Samaritan’s love. The irony of the story is that one not considered worthy to be called “neighbor” by Jews was precisely the one who showed himself to be “neighbor” to the victim (vv 36-37).<\/p>\nThe parable, like the statement in Matthew 5:43-48, reveals Jesus’ own understanding of “neighbor” and what “love of neighbor” demands. Jesus sets no limitation on who qualifies as the neighbor commanded by God to be loved.<\/p>\nThe forcefulness and power of Jesus’ teachings on the love of neighbor and its relationship to one’s love for God are demonstrated by a similar emphasis within the early church. Paul on two occasions called the love of neighbor the fulfillment of the entire law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14), while James referred to the same commandment as “the royal law” (Jas 2:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","summary_en":"NEIGHBOR Concept apparently limited in the OT period and late Judaism to one’s fellow Israelite, or member of the covenant, and extended by Jesus to include anyone encountered in life. In the Old Testament Although it is never explicitly limited as such, the prominent connotation of “neighbor” in the OT is that of a fellow member of the covenant community; that is, another Israelite (see Lv 6:1-7; 19; Dt 15:2-3). In Leviticus 19:18, a passage often quoted in the NT, the Israelite is commanded...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52532,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:34","content_ro":"31:34<\/strong> The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive:<\/em> Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember:<\/em> When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).<\/p>","content_en":"31:34<\/strong> The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive:<\/em> Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember:<\/em> When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:34 The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive: Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember: When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).","summary_en":"31:34 The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive: Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember: When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80158,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:34","content_ro":"31:34<\/strong> The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive:<\/em> Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember:<\/em> When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).<\/p>","content_en":"31:34<\/strong> The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive:<\/em> Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember:<\/em> When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:34 The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive: Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember: When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).","summary_en":"31:34 The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive: Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember: When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107784,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:34","content_ro":"31:34<\/strong> The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive:<\/em> Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember:<\/em> When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).<\/p>","content_en":"31:34<\/strong> The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive:<\/em> Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember:<\/em> When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:34 The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive: Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember: When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).","summary_en":"31:34 The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive: Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember: When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135410,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:34","content_ro":"31:34<\/strong> The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive:<\/em> Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember:<\/em> When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).<\/p>","content_en":"31:34<\/strong> The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive:<\/em> Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember:<\/em> When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:34 The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive: Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember: When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).","summary_en":"31:34 The old covenant had to be taught (see Deut 6:4-9), but the heart of the new covenant would be an inner, personal relationship with the Lord. • I will forgive: Each repentant believer would experience God’s forgiveness. • I will never again remember: When sins are forgiven, they can never bring divine judgment (see Heb 10:17). • Jesus’ death inaugurated the new covenant (see Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8; 9:15; 12:22-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64600,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Knowing God","title_en":"Knowing God","content_ro":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","summary_en":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92226,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Knowing God","title_en":"Knowing God","content_ro":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","summary_en":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119852,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Knowing God","title_en":"Knowing God","content_ro":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","summary_en":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147478,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Knowing God","title_en":"Knowing God","content_ro":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Knowing God<\/h3>\nFrom our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewing everything as God does and learning to imitate him. Knowing God will transform our thoughts and actions, our priorities and values, and our relationships with fellow human beings. It is far more important than religious rites, sacrifices and burnt offerings, or any other religious activities (see Jer 9:23-24; 31:34).<\/p>\nThe prophet Hosea strongly emphasizes the importance of knowing God. He demonstrates that Israel would ultimately be destroyed (Hos 4:6) because they did not know God (4:1). This theme of knowing God is also prevalent in the New Testament Gospel of John. Jesus repeatedly stresses the need to know God, affirming that people can be heavily involved in religious practice but have no genuine relationship with God (see John 7:25-29; 8:14-19, 54-55; 14:6-11; 17:1-3).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nExod 33:8, 11; Num 12:6-8; Isa 11:9; 43:10; Jer 9:24; 31:33-34; Hos 6:3, 6; John 17:3; Phil 3:10; Titus 1:16; Heb 8:10-13; 1 Jn 2:4; 4:6, 8; 3 Jn 1:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","summary_en":"Knowing God From our perspective, knowledge tends to mean information, facts, and concepts. But in biblical times, knowledge was centered in personal relationships. To know someone is to enter into a close relationship with that person. Knowing God involves much more than simply mastering facts and information about him. It even transcends discussions about the nature and character of God, as important as those are. Knowing God means entering into a close relationship with him. It means viewi...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"35":[{"id":26258,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Moon","title_en":"Moon","content_ro":"<h3>MOON<\/h3>\nLesser luminary of the heavens (Gn 1:16). Many Semitic languages use the same word for moon as the Hebrew. In three passages in the Hebrew OT (Sg 6:10; Is 24:23; 30:26), the moon is called “the white one,” and paired with “the hot one,” the sun. Another term, “crescent,” is used in other languages such as Aramaic and Arabic, and “crescent ornaments” (Jgs 8:21, 26; Is 3:18) are mentioned.<\/p>\nIn the creation account, it is said concerning the functions of the two luminaries: “They will be signs to mark off the seasons, the days, and the years” (Gn 1:14, nlt<\/span>)—that is, “times” are determined by their movements. For this reason, when telling about the mighty deeds of the Lord in Creation, the poet says, “You made the moon to mark the seasons” (Ps 104:19, nlt<\/span>). The ancient Hebrew calendar was lunar (Ecclus 43:6-7), the months beginning with the new moon, marked by special rituals (Nm 10:10; 28:11-14; 2 Chr 2:4). Two great festivals, Passover and Tabernacles, began in midmonth when the moon was full (Lv 23:5-6; Ps 81:3-5; and Lv 23:34, respectively). The seven-day week is a division of the 28-day lunar cycle into logical and convenient units, so the moon may be said to provide the basis for the significance of the number seven. As a corollary, the beginning of the seventh month, the Festival of Trumpets (Lv 23:24), marked the climax month of the sacred feasts; it also signified the New Year for regnal years and for agriculture (Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 1.1.3; Mishnah, Rosh Hashanah<\/em> 1:1).<\/p>\nOne verse in the creation story speaks of the sun’s dominion over the day and the moon’s over the night (Gn 1:16; cf. Ps 136:9). The moon is also mentioned (alongside the sun) in the general order of creation when the spheres of the universe were established (Jer 31:35). From this the luminaries symbolize the continuity of the world order (Pss 72:5; 89:37-38). The darkening of the moon (and the sun) is a sign of the change of the order in creation in the latter days (Is 13:10; Ez 32:7; Jl 2:10; Hb 3:11; Mt 24:29; Mk 13:24; Rv 6:12; the converse is stated in Is 30:26). Since the moon resembles the sun, it also has the power to smite (Ps 121:6) and to influence the growth of crops in the field (Dt 33:14). In the book of Deuteronomy, the Israelites were warned against worshiping the moon and the rest of the host of heaven (Dt 4:19; 17:3), but this foreign worship made its inroads into the Judean kingdom (2 Kgs 21:3; 23:4-5; Jer 7:18; 8:2).<\/p>\nTo keep an accurate control over the calendar and the feasts, the new moon was carefully observed seven times during the year in Jerusalem. This assured that the major feasts fell on the proper days. The Sanhedrin would gather early in the morning on the last day of the preceding month, and watchmen were posted to observe the moon’s first appearance. When the evidence became clear, the sacred word was pronounced and the day became the first of the new month. Fire signals beginning from the Mt of Olives announced the new moon; later they were replaced by messengers because the Samaritans had set up false signals along the way.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Astronomy; Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Feasts and Festivals of Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MOON<\/h3>\nLesser luminary of the heavens (Gn 1:16). Many Semitic languages use the same word for moon as the Hebrew. In three passages in the Hebrew OT (Sg 6:10; Is 24:23; 30:26), the moon is called “the white one,” and paired with “the hot one,” the sun. Another term, “crescent,” is used in other languages such as Aramaic and Arabic, and “crescent ornaments” (Jgs 8:21, 26; Is 3:18) are mentioned.<\/p>\nIn the creation account, it is said concerning the functions of the two luminaries: “They will be signs to mark off the seasons, the days, and the years” (Gn 1:14, nlt<\/span>)—that is, “times” are determined by their movements. For this reason, when telling about the mighty deeds of the Lord in Creation, the poet says, “You made the moon to mark the seasons” (Ps 104:19, nlt<\/span>). The ancient Hebrew calendar was lunar (Ecclus 43:6-7), the months beginning with the new moon, marked by special rituals (Nm 10:10; 28:11-14; 2 Chr 2:4). Two great festivals, Passover and Tabernacles, began in midmonth when the moon was full (Lv 23:5-6; Ps 81:3-5; and Lv 23:34, respectively). The seven-day week is a division of the 28-day lunar cycle into logical and convenient units, so the moon may be said to provide the basis for the significance of the number seven. As a corollary, the beginning of the seventh month, the Festival of Trumpets (Lv 23:24), marked the climax month of the sacred feasts; it also signified the New Year for regnal years and for agriculture (Josephus’s Antiquities<\/em> 1.1.3; Mishnah, Rosh Hashanah<\/em> 1:1).<\/p>\nOne verse in the creation story speaks of the sun’s dominion over the day and the moon’s over the night (Gn 1:16; cf. Ps 136:9). The moon is also mentioned (alongside the sun) in the general order of creation when the spheres of the universe were established (Jer 31:35). From this the luminaries symbolize the continuity of the world order (Pss 72:5; 89:37-38). The darkening of the moon (and the sun) is a sign of the change of the order in creation in the latter days (Is 13:10; Ez 32:7; Jl 2:10; Hb 3:11; Mt 24:29; Mk 13:24; Rv 6:12; the converse is stated in Is 30:26). Since the moon resembles the sun, it also has the power to smite (Ps 121:6) and to influence the growth of crops in the field (Dt 33:14). In the book of Deuteronomy, the Israelites were warned against worshiping the moon and the rest of the host of heaven (Dt 4:19; 17:3), but this foreign worship made its inroads into the Judean kingdom (2 Kgs 21:3; 23:4-5; Jer 7:18; 8:2).<\/p>\nTo keep an accurate control over the calendar and the feasts, the new moon was carefully observed seven times during the year in Jerusalem. This assured that the major feasts fell on the proper days. The Sanhedrin would gather early in the morning on the last day of the preceding month, and watchmen were posted to observe the moon’s first appearance. When the evidence became clear, the sacred word was pronounced and the day became the first of the new month. Fire signals beginning from the Mt of Olives announced the new moon; later they were replaced by messengers because the Samaritans had set up false signals along the way.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Astronomy; Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Feasts and Festivals of Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MOON Lesser luminary of the heavens (Gn 1:16). Many Semitic languages use the same word for moon as the Hebrew. In three passages in the Hebrew OT (Sg 6:10; Is 24:23; 30:26), the moon is called “the white one,” and paired with “the hot one,” the sun. Another term, “crescent,” is used in other languages such as Aramaic and Arabic, and “crescent ornaments” (Jgs 8:21, 26; Is 3:18) are mentioned. In the creation account, it is said concerning the functions of the two luminaries: “They will be sig...","summary_en":"MOON Lesser luminary of the heavens (Gn 1:16). Many Semitic languages use the same word for moon as the Hebrew. In three passages in the Hebrew OT (Sg 6:10; Is 24:23; 30:26), the moon is called “the white one,” and paired with “the hot one,” the sun. Another term, “crescent,” is used in other languages such as Aramaic and Arabic, and “crescent ornaments” (Jgs 8:21, 26; Is 3:18) are mentioned. In the creation account, it is said concerning the functions of the two luminaries: “They will be sig...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52533,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:35","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:35","content_ro":"31:35-37<\/strong> The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"31:35-37<\/strong> The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"31:35-37 The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.","summary_en":"31:35-37 The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80159,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:35","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:35","content_ro":"31:35-37<\/strong> The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"31:35-37<\/strong> The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"31:35-37 The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.","summary_en":"31:35-37 The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107785,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:35","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:35","content_ro":"31:35-37<\/strong> The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"31:35-37<\/strong> The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"31:35-37 The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.","summary_en":"31:35-37 The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135411,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:35","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:35","content_ro":"31:35-37<\/strong> The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.<\/em><\/p>","content_en":"31:35-37<\/strong> The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.<\/em><\/p>","summary_ro":"31:35-37 The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.","summary_en":"31:35-37 The Lord compared his promise of the new covenant to his faithfulness in maintaining the laws of nature.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"37":[{"id":9923,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Earth","title_en":"Earth","content_ro":"<h3>EARTH<\/h3>\nTerm used for our inhabited planet; the world, as distinguished from heaven and hell; land; soil; and in several other ways. Biblical usage is as broad as modern usage.<\/p>\nOne Hebrew word translated “earth” is also used generically for “man,” or Adam (Gn 2:7, 19). That word refers to reddish soil from which Adam’s body was made. Another Hebrew word translated “earth” or “land” can refer to a country (21:21). A word translated “dust” can mean simply earth or dry ground (3:19). In the NT one Greek word translated “earth” can refer to a land or country (Mt 27:45). The Greek word from which “ecumenical” is derived refers to the whole inhabited earth (Lk 21:26) or the Roman Empire of those days (2:1).<\/p>\nIn the beginning “God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. . . . And God said, ‘Let the earth put forth vegetation’” (Gn 1:10-11, rsv<\/span>). In some passages “the earth” is used in essentially the modern sense for the whole planet (Jb 1:7), hanging in empty space (26:7). References to the earth’s four corners (Is 11:12; Ez 7:2) allude to the points of a compass, not to the earth’s shape. The circle of the earth probably refers to the circumference of the horizon (Is 40:22; cf. Jb 38:13). The earth is sometimes pictured as supported on pillars (Jb 9:6; Ps 75:3) or foundations (Ps 104:5; Prv 8:29; Is 24:18; Jer 31:37). Since many of the biblical usages are found in figurative passages of poetry or prophecy, they reveal little about the Hebrews’ cosmological understanding.<\/p>\n“Earth” sometimes refers to the soil or ground that a farmer works (cf. 2 Kgs 5:17). According to the Bible, the original condition of the earth (Gn 2:6) was affected by the curse of human sinfulness (3:17-19). (Modern ecologists seem to agree that the earth suffers because of human greed and arrogance.) After Abel’s blood was spilled on the ground, Cain’s difficulty in making the soil produce for him was a constant reminder that he had murdered his brother (4:8-12).<\/p>\nThe Israelites were instructed to let the land rest every seventh year (Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:4-5), allowing the soil to replenish nutrients used up by crops. After seven such “sabbath years,” in the 50th “jubilee year” the land reverted back to original family holdings (Lv 25:10-17). That provision not only reminded the people of God’s ultimate ownership but kept potential “land barons” from amassing huge estates.<\/p>\nThe Mosaic law instructed the Israelites that the land’s condition would be a spiritual barometer of their relationship with God. Drought or lack of productivity was a sign that the relationship had been broken (Lv 26; Dt 28). Israel was warned that their wickedness could become so great that the Lord would evict them from his land (cf. Lv 26:37; Dt 28:64). Even if that happened, however, God would eventually restore his people so they could again be “wedded” to the land (Is 62:4).<\/p>\nMany passages point to a “coming age,” when the earth will be set free from its “bondage to decay,” a deliverance for which the whole creation is said to be “groaning” in anticipation (Rom 8:19-23). The Bible pictures a period of prodigious renewal of the earth’s fertility (Ez 47; Jl 3:18; Am 9:13-15; Zec 14:6-9). One day, however, “the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the works that are upon it will be burned up” (2 Pt 3:10, rsv<\/span>). Yet in the apostle John’s apocalyptic vision, he saw “a new heaven and a new earth, for the old heaven and the old earth had disappeared” (Rv 21:1, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> New Heavens and New Earth.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EARTH<\/h3>\nTerm used for our inhabited planet; the world, as distinguished from heaven and hell; land; soil; and in several other ways. Biblical usage is as broad as modern usage.<\/p>\nOne Hebrew word translated “earth” is also used generically for “man,” or Adam (Gn 2:7, 19). That word refers to reddish soil from which Adam’s body was made. Another Hebrew word translated “earth” or “land” can refer to a country (21:21). A word translated “dust” can mean simply earth or dry ground (3:19). In the NT one Greek word translated “earth” can refer to a land or country (Mt 27:45). The Greek word from which “ecumenical” is derived refers to the whole inhabited earth (Lk 21:26) or the Roman Empire of those days (2:1).<\/p>\nIn the beginning “God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. . . . And God said, ‘Let the earth put forth vegetation’” (Gn 1:10-11, rsv<\/span>). In some passages “the earth” is used in essentially the modern sense for the whole planet (Jb 1:7), hanging in empty space (26:7). References to the earth’s four corners (Is 11:12; Ez 7:2) allude to the points of a compass, not to the earth’s shape. The circle of the earth probably refers to the circumference of the horizon (Is 40:22; cf. Jb 38:13). The earth is sometimes pictured as supported on pillars (Jb 9:6; Ps 75:3) or foundations (Ps 104:5; Prv 8:29; Is 24:18; Jer 31:37). Since many of the biblical usages are found in figurative passages of poetry or prophecy, they reveal little about the Hebrews’ cosmological understanding.<\/p>\n“Earth” sometimes refers to the soil or ground that a farmer works (cf. 2 Kgs 5:17). According to the Bible, the original condition of the earth (Gn 2:6) was affected by the curse of human sinfulness (3:17-19). (Modern ecologists seem to agree that the earth suffers because of human greed and arrogance.) After Abel’s blood was spilled on the ground, Cain’s difficulty in making the soil produce for him was a constant reminder that he had murdered his brother (4:8-12).<\/p>\nThe Israelites were instructed to let the land rest every seventh year (Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:4-5), allowing the soil to replenish nutrients used up by crops. After seven such “sabbath years,” in the 50th “jubilee year” the land reverted back to original family holdings (Lv 25:10-17). That provision not only reminded the people of God’s ultimate ownership but kept potential “land barons” from amassing huge estates.<\/p>\nThe Mosaic law instructed the Israelites that the land’s condition would be a spiritual barometer of their relationship with God. Drought or lack of productivity was a sign that the relationship had been broken (Lv 26; Dt 28). Israel was warned that their wickedness could become so great that the Lord would evict them from his land (cf. Lv 26:37; Dt 28:64). Even if that happened, however, God would eventually restore his people so they could again be “wedded” to the land (Is 62:4).<\/p>\nMany passages point to a “coming age,” when the earth will be set free from its “bondage to decay,” a deliverance for which the whole creation is said to be “groaning” in anticipation (Rom 8:19-23). The Bible pictures a period of prodigious renewal of the earth’s fertility (Ez 47; Jl 3:18; Am 9:13-15; Zec 14:6-9). One day, however, “the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the works that are upon it will be burned up” (2 Pt 3:10, rsv<\/span>). Yet in the apostle John’s apocalyptic vision, he saw “a new heaven and a new earth, for the old heaven and the old earth had disappeared” (Rv 21:1, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> New Heavens and New Earth.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EARTH Term used for our inhabited planet; the world, as distinguished from heaven and hell; land; soil; and in several other ways. Biblical usage is as broad as modern usage. One Hebrew word translated “earth” is also used generically for “man,” or Adam (Gn 2:7, 19). That word refers to reddish soil from which Adam’s body was made. Another Hebrew word translated “earth” or “land” can refer to a country (21:21). A word translated “dust” can mean simply earth or dry ground (3:19). In the NT one...","summary_en":"EARTH Term used for our inhabited planet; the world, as distinguished from heaven and hell; land; soil; and in several other ways. Biblical usage is as broad as modern usage. One Hebrew word translated “earth” is also used generically for “man,” or Adam (Gn 2:7, 19). That word refers to reddish soil from which Adam’s body was made. Another Hebrew word translated “earth” or “land” can refer to a country (21:21). A word translated “dust” can mean simply earth or dry ground (3:19). In the NT one...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"38":[{"id":7746,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Corner Gate","title_en":"Corner Gate","content_ro":"<h3>CORNER GATE<\/h3>\nGate presumably located in the northwest corner of the Jerusalem wall. After King Jehoash of Israel captured King Amaziah of Judah, he tore down a section of the Jerusalem wall from the Corner Gate to the Ephraim Gate (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 25:23); later King Uzziah of Judah built towers at this gate (2 Chr 26:9). Jeremiah (Jer 31:38) foretells a time when the Jerusalem wall will be rebuilt from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate. Zechariah (Zec 14:10) also envisions a period of security and prosperity epitomized by the presence of the Jerusalem wall, including the Corner Gate.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jerusalem.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CORNER GATE<\/h3>\nGate presumably located in the northwest corner of the Jerusalem wall. After King Jehoash of Israel captured King Amaziah of Judah, he tore down a section of the Jerusalem wall from the Corner Gate to the Ephraim Gate (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 25:23); later King Uzziah of Judah built towers at this gate (2 Chr 26:9). Jeremiah (Jer 31:38) foretells a time when the Jerusalem wall will be rebuilt from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate. Zechariah (Zec 14:10) also envisions a period of security and prosperity epitomized by the presence of the Jerusalem wall, including the Corner Gate.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jerusalem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CORNER GATE Gate presumably located in the northwest corner of the Jerusalem wall. After King Jehoash of Israel captured King Amaziah of Judah, he tore down a section of the Jerusalem wall from the Corner Gate to the Ephraim Gate (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 25:23); later King Uzziah of Judah built towers at this gate (2 Chr 26:9). Jeremiah (Jer 31:38) foretells a time when the Jerusalem wall will be rebuilt from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate. Zechariah (Zec 14:10) also envisions a period of...","summary_en":"CORNER GATE Gate presumably located in the northwest corner of the Jerusalem wall. After King Jehoash of Israel captured King Amaziah of Judah, he tore down a section of the Jerusalem wall from the Corner Gate to the Ephraim Gate (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 25:23); later King Uzziah of Judah built towers at this gate (2 Chr 26:9). Jeremiah (Jer 31:38) foretells a time when the Jerusalem wall will be rebuilt from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate. Zechariah (Zec 14:10) also envisions a period of...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15204,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tower of Hananel","title_en":"Tower of Hananel","content_ro":"<h3>HANANEL, Tower of<\/h3>\nTower on the north wall of Jerusalem, located near the Sheep Gate (Neh 3:1; 12:39; kjv<\/span> “Hananeel”). Later in Israel’s history John Hyrcanus erected a Maccabean fortress on this spot, which Pompey destroyed in 63 BC<\/span>. Still later, Herod the Great built the Tower of Antonia here to oversee the temple area. Two prophecies refer to the Tower of Hananel as a boundary point in the rebuilding of Jerusalem (Jer 31:38; Zec 14:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HANANEL, Tower of<\/h3>\nTower on the north wall of Jerusalem, located near the Sheep Gate (Neh 3:1; 12:39; kjv<\/span> “Hananeel”). Later in Israel’s history John Hyrcanus erected a Maccabean fortress on this spot, which Pompey destroyed in 63 BC<\/span>. Still later, Herod the Great built the Tower of Antonia here to oversee the temple area. Two prophecies refer to the Tower of Hananel as a boundary point in the rebuilding of Jerusalem (Jer 31:38; Zec 14:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HANANEL, Tower of Tower on the north wall of Jerusalem, located near the Sheep Gate (Neh 3:1; 12:39; kjv “Hananeel”). Later in Israel’s history John Hyrcanus erected a Maccabean fortress on this spot, which Pompey destroyed in 63 BC. Still later, Herod the Great built the Tower of Antonia here to oversee the temple area. Two prophecies refer to the Tower of Hananel as a boundary point in the rebuilding of Jerusalem (Jer 31:38; Zec 14:10).","summary_en":"HANANEL, Tower of Tower on the north wall of Jerusalem, located near the Sheep Gate (Neh 3:1; 12:39; kjv “Hananeel”). Later in Israel’s history John Hyrcanus erected a Maccabean fortress on this spot, which Pompey destroyed in 63 BC. Still later, Herod the Great built the Tower of Antonia here to oversee the temple area. Two prophecies refer to the Tower of Hananel as a boundary point in the rebuilding of Jerusalem (Jer 31:38; Zec 14:10).","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21699,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kidron","title_en":"Kidron","content_ro":"<h3>KIDRON<\/h3>\nValley and streambed running below the southeast wall of Jerusalem and separating the city from the Mt of Olives on the east. It then turns southeast from Jerusalem and follows a winding course to the Dead Sea. The Kidron can be described as a torrent bed that is nearly always dry, since the watercourse flows only in the rainy season, partly maintained by the two irregular springs Gihon and En-rogel.<\/p>\nThe Gihon was the vital water source for the old City of David, and in Hezekiah’s day an underground tunnel was cut in the rock to guarantee a water supply in time of siege, thus supplying the pool of Siloam within the city walls.<\/p>\nThe term “brook” found in John 18:1 (kjv<\/span>) would be better translated “winter flow” or “winter course,” since the original word intends to convey this seasonal character of the creek rather than to suggest a river.<\/p>\nThe two most important functions of the Kidron Valley for the city of Jerusalem are military and funerary. The walls of the city have always towered over the valley, and its steepness made it extremely difficult for any attack to succeed from that side. Over the centuries rubble from nearby ruins has raised the floor of the valley. In places the present floor is some 40 feet (12.2 meters) above earlier historic levels; it is not certain how many ancient caves and tombs must lie below the present surface. The wide space just south of the city, where the Kidron meets and merges with the Tyropean and Hinnom Valleys, has always been a favorite spot for the royal gardens, irrigated from the two nearby springs.<\/p>\n\nSince the fourth century AD<\/span>, the Kidron has been called “the valley of Jehoshaphat” (Jl 3:12), scene of the judgment of nations at the last day, and this tradition is strong among both Muslims and Jews. Today the sides of the valley are crowded with tombs. Even before the exile it was a popular place for burial (2 Kgs 23:4-12 refers to the graves of the common people and to the dumping of idolatrous refuse there; see also 2 Chr 34:4-5).<\/p>\nThe first reference to the Kidron Valley is in 2 Samuel 15:23, where the people and David crossed over toward the desert. This strategic move would give them a way of escape if rebellious Absalom’s forces decided to attack the city. The people and the king wept bitterly during this move (2 Sm 15:30) because it had such a depressing significance; David was abandoning Zion without a fight. Later the offensive Shimei was forbidden to cross the Kidron by Solomon (1 Kgs 2:36-38) on pain of death. Josephus mentions that the wicked queen Athaliah was put to death in the Kidron Valley (Antiquities<\/em> 9.7.3), but it is not clear from 2 Kings 11:16 whether the horses’ entrance to the palace opened onto the Kidron.<\/p>\nThe last reference to the Kidron is the occasion of Jesus’ crossing it with his disciples on the eve of his betrayal (Jn 18:1). The parallels with the crossing of David are interesting, considering the place David holds in the establishment of the biblical symbolism of king and kingdom. Eschatologically, Jeremiah foretells a time when the Kidron will be sacred to the Lord (Jer 31:38-40) as part of the restoration of Israel.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jerusalem.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KIDRON<\/h3>\nValley and streambed running below the southeast wall of Jerusalem and separating the city from the Mt of Olives on the east. It then turns southeast from Jerusalem and follows a winding course to the Dead Sea. The Kidron can be described as a torrent bed that is nearly always dry, since the watercourse flows only in the rainy season, partly maintained by the two irregular springs Gihon and En-rogel.<\/p>\nThe Gihon was the vital water source for the old City of David, and in Hezekiah’s day an underground tunnel was cut in the rock to guarantee a water supply in time of siege, thus supplying the pool of Siloam within the city walls.<\/p>\nThe term “brook” found in John 18:1 (kjv<\/span>) would be better translated “winter flow” or “winter course,” since the original word intends to convey this seasonal character of the creek rather than to suggest a river.<\/p>\nThe two most important functions of the Kidron Valley for the city of Jerusalem are military and funerary. The walls of the city have always towered over the valley, and its steepness made it extremely difficult for any attack to succeed from that side. Over the centuries rubble from nearby ruins has raised the floor of the valley. In places the present floor is some 40 feet (12.2 meters) above earlier historic levels; it is not certain how many ancient caves and tombs must lie below the present surface. The wide space just south of the city, where the Kidron meets and merges with the Tyropean and Hinnom Valleys, has always been a favorite spot for the royal gardens, irrigated from the two nearby springs.<\/p>\n\nSince the fourth century AD<\/span>, the Kidron has been called “the valley of Jehoshaphat” (Jl 3:12), scene of the judgment of nations at the last day, and this tradition is strong among both Muslims and Jews. Today the sides of the valley are crowded with tombs. Even before the exile it was a popular place for burial (2 Kgs 23:4-12 refers to the graves of the common people and to the dumping of idolatrous refuse there; see also 2 Chr 34:4-5).<\/p>\nThe first reference to the Kidron Valley is in 2 Samuel 15:23, where the people and David crossed over toward the desert. This strategic move would give them a way of escape if rebellious Absalom’s forces decided to attack the city. The people and the king wept bitterly during this move (2 Sm 15:30) because it had such a depressing significance; David was abandoning Zion without a fight. Later the offensive Shimei was forbidden to cross the Kidron by Solomon (1 Kgs 2:36-38) on pain of death. Josephus mentions that the wicked queen Athaliah was put to death in the Kidron Valley (Antiquities<\/em> 9.7.3), but it is not clear from 2 Kings 11:16 whether the horses’ entrance to the palace opened onto the Kidron.<\/p>\nThe last reference to the Kidron is the occasion of Jesus’ crossing it with his disciples on the eve of his betrayal (Jn 18:1). The parallels with the crossing of David are interesting, considering the place David holds in the establishment of the biblical symbolism of king and kingdom. Eschatologically, Jeremiah foretells a time when the Kidron will be sacred to the Lord (Jer 31:38-40) as part of the restoration of Israel.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jerusalem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KIDRON Valley and streambed running below the southeast wall of Jerusalem and separating the city from the Mt of Olives on the east. It then turns southeast from Jerusalem and follows a winding course to the Dead Sea. The Kidron can be described as a torrent bed that is nearly always dry, since the watercourse flows only in the rainy season, partly maintained by the two irregular springs Gihon and En-rogel. The Gihon was the vital water source for the old City of David, and in Hezekiah’s day ...","summary_en":"KIDRON Valley and streambed running below the southeast wall of Jerusalem and separating the city from the Mt of Olives on the east. It then turns southeast from Jerusalem and follows a winding course to the Dead Sea. The Kidron can be described as a torrent bed that is nearly always dry, since the watercourse flows only in the rainy season, partly maintained by the two irregular springs Gihon and En-rogel. The Gihon was the vital water source for the old City of David, and in Hezekiah’s day ...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52534,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:38","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:38","content_ro":"31:38<\/strong> The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem<\/em> to be rebuilt<\/em>. The Tower of Hananel<\/em> stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate<\/em> had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).<\/p>","content_en":"31:38<\/strong> The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem<\/em> to be rebuilt<\/em>. The Tower of Hananel<\/em> stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate<\/em> had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:38 The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem to be rebuilt. The Tower of Hananel stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).","summary_en":"31:38 The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem to be rebuilt. The Tower of Hananel stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80160,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:38","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:38","content_ro":"31:38<\/strong> The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem<\/em> to be rebuilt<\/em>. The Tower of Hananel<\/em> stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate<\/em> had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).<\/p>","content_en":"31:38<\/strong> The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem<\/em> to be rebuilt<\/em>. The Tower of Hananel<\/em> stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate<\/em> had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:38 The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem to be rebuilt. The Tower of Hananel stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).","summary_en":"31:38 The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem to be rebuilt. The Tower of Hananel stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107786,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:38","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:38","content_ro":"31:38<\/strong> The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem<\/em> to be rebuilt<\/em>. The Tower of Hananel<\/em> stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate<\/em> had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).<\/p>","content_en":"31:38<\/strong> The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem<\/em> to be rebuilt<\/em>. The Tower of Hananel<\/em> stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate<\/em> had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:38 The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem to be rebuilt. The Tower of Hananel stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).","summary_en":"31:38 The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem to be rebuilt. The Tower of Hananel stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135412,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:38","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:38","content_ro":"31:38<\/strong> The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem<\/em> to be rebuilt<\/em>. The Tower of Hananel<\/em> stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate<\/em> had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).<\/p>","content_en":"31:38<\/strong> The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem<\/em> to be rebuilt<\/em>. The Tower of Hananel<\/em> stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate<\/em> had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:38 The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem to be rebuilt. The Tower of Hananel stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).","summary_en":"31:38 The Lord revealed his plan for Jerusalem to be rebuilt. The Tower of Hananel stood at the northeast corner of the old city, while the Corner Gate had been at the northwest corner (2 Kgs 14:13; 2 Chr 26:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"39":[{"id":13224,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gareb (Place)","title_en":"Gareb (Place)","content_ro":"<h3>GAREB (Place<\/span>)<\/h3>\nHill near Jerusalem mentioned in Jeremiah 31:39 as a future boundary of the city, perhaps on the south or west side.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GAREB (Place<\/span>)<\/h3>\nHill near Jerusalem mentioned in Jeremiah 31:39 as a future boundary of the city, perhaps on the south or west side.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GAREB (Place) Hill near Jerusalem mentioned in Jeremiah 31:39 as a future boundary of the city, perhaps on the south or west side.","summary_en":"GAREB (Place) Hill near Jerusalem mentioned in Jeremiah 31:39 as a future boundary of the city, perhaps on the south or west side.","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14073,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Goah","title_en":"Goah","content_ro":"<h3>GOAH<\/h3>\nLocation mentioned in connection with the hill of Gareb, to which the restored city of Jerusalem will extend. Goah is situated south of Gareb (Jer 31:39, kjv<\/span> “Goath”).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOAH<\/h3>\nLocation mentioned in connection with the hill of Gareb, to which the restored city of Jerusalem will extend. Goah is situated south of Gareb (Jer 31:39, kjv<\/span> “Goath”).<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOAH Location mentioned in connection with the hill of Gareb, to which the restored city of Jerusalem will extend. Goah is situated south of Gareb (Jer 31:39, kjv “Goath”).","summary_en":"GOAH Location mentioned in connection with the hill of Gareb, to which the restored city of Jerusalem will extend. Goah is situated south of Gareb (Jer 31:39, kjv “Goath”).","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14074,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Goath*","title_en":"Goath*","content_ro":"<h3>GOATH*<\/h3>\nKJV spelling of Goah in Jeremiah 31:39. See<\/em> Goah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOATH*<\/h3>\nKJV spelling of Goah in Jeremiah 31:39. See<\/em> Goah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOATH* KJV spelling of Goah in Jeremiah 31:39. See Goah.","summary_en":"GOATH* KJV spelling of Goah in Jeremiah 31:39. See Goah.","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52535,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:39","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:39","content_ro":"31:39<\/strong> Gareb<\/em> and Goah<\/em> do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.<\/p>","content_en":"31:39<\/strong> Gareb<\/em> and Goah<\/em> do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:39 Gareb and Goah do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.","summary_en":"31:39 Gareb and Goah do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80161,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:39","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:39","content_ro":"31:39<\/strong> Gareb<\/em> and Goah<\/em> do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.<\/p>","content_en":"31:39<\/strong> Gareb<\/em> and Goah<\/em> do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:39 Gareb and Goah do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.","summary_en":"31:39 Gareb and Goah do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107787,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:39","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:39","content_ro":"31:39<\/strong> Gareb<\/em> and Goah<\/em> do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.<\/p>","content_en":"31:39<\/strong> Gareb<\/em> and Goah<\/em> do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:39 Gareb and Goah do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.","summary_en":"31:39 Gareb and Goah do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135413,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:39","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:39","content_ro":"31:39<\/strong> Gareb<\/em> and Goah<\/em> do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.<\/p>","content_en":"31:39<\/strong> Gareb<\/em> and Goah<\/em> do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:39 Gareb and Goah do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.","summary_en":"31:39 Gareb and Goah do not appear elsewhere in Scripture, but they were probably on the west side of the city.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"40":[{"id":1955,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Animals","title_en":"Animals","content_ro":"<h3>ANIMALS<\/h3>\nIn biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals as object lessons.<\/p>\nThe biblical approach to classification of animals is somewhat different from the system of classification used by biologists today. The present system of classification, which traces back to Carolus Linnaeus (an 18th-century Swedish botanist), is based on structure, both internal and external. The biblical basis of classification is habitat. Thus Genesis 1 speaks of aquatic organisms (v 20); aerial organisms (v 21); animals that crawl on the ground (v 24); cattle or domesticated animals (animals that live in association with humans) (v 24); and wild animals (v 24). The same system of classification is followed in Leviticus 11 and throughout Scripture.<\/p>\nBecause of the divergence between systems of classification, the various animals of the Bible will be listed here in alphabetical order—including reptiles, fish, and even invertebrates such as insects, spiders, worms, and sponges. Birds are discussed in a separate article.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Adder<\/p>\n• Ant<\/p>\n• Antelope<\/p>\n• Ape<\/p>\n• Asp<\/p>\n• Ass<\/p>\n• Badger<\/p>\n• Bat<\/p>\n• Bear<\/p>\n• Bee<\/p>\n• Behemoth<\/p>\n• Camel<\/p>\n• Caterpillar<\/p>\n• Cattle<\/p>\n• Chameleon<\/p>\n• Coral<\/p>\n• Cricket<\/p>\n• Crocodile<\/p>\n• Deer<\/p>\n• Dog<\/p>\n• Donkey<\/p>\n• Dragon<\/p>\n• Fish<\/p>\n• Flea<\/p>\n• Fly<\/p>\n• Fox<\/p>\n• Frog<\/p>\n• Gazelle<\/p>\n• Gecko<\/p>\n• Gnat<\/p>\n• Goat<\/p>\n• Grasshopper<\/p>\n• Hare<\/p>\n• Hippopotamus<\/p>\n• Horse<\/p>\n• Hyena<\/p>\n• Jackal<\/p>\n• Leech<\/p>\n• Leopard<\/p>\n• Leviathan<\/p>\n• Lion<\/p>\n• Lizard<\/p>\n• Locust<\/p>\n• Mole<\/p>\n• Moth<\/p>\n• Mouse<\/p>\n• Mule<\/p>\n• Pig<\/p>\n• Porcupine<\/p>\n• Scorpion<\/p>\n• Sheep<\/p>\n• Snail<\/p>\n• Snake<\/p>\n• Spider<\/p>\n• Sponge<\/p>\n• Unicorn<\/p>\n• Wasp<\/p>\n• Whale<\/p>\n• Wild Ox<\/p>\n• Wolf<\/p>\n• Worm<\/p>\n\nAdder<\/p>\nOne of the 20 poisonous snakes found in Israel and surrounding countries, also referred to as cockatrice and viper. True vipers (genus Cerastes, Echis colorata,<\/em> and Vipera palestina<\/em>) also exist there, poisonous snakes with curved fangs that spring into position when the snake strikes. The horned viper (Cerastes hasselquistii)<\/em> may attack horses. It is 12 to 18 inches (30 to 46 centimeters) long and often lies in ambush in the sand with only its eyes and the hornlike protrusions on its head visible.<\/p>\nBoth Jesus and John the Baptist referred to the viper several times (Mt 3:7; 12:34; 23:33). The reference in Acts 28:3 is probably to a small viper (Vipera aspis)<\/em> that strikes rapidly and is very pugnacious. It is found in southern Europe and hisses each time it inhales and exhales. The poison of vipers attacks the respiratory system and disintegrates red blood cells.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\nAnt<\/p>\nMentioned only twice in the Bible, both times in the book of Proverbs. For many years Solomon was charged with a biological error when he referred to the ant as providing her meat in the summer and gathering her food in the harvest (Prv 6:8). Critics of the Bible were quick to point out that, so far as was then known, ants do not store up food. They assumed that Solomon had probably kicked open an ant hill and mistaken the pupal cases (pods in which immature ants grow to maturity) for grain or had observed ants carrying bits of grain, leaves, and other matter to their nests.<\/p>\nAt least three species of grain-storing ants are now known—two occur in Israel and the other in Mediterranean countries. The particular species referred to by Solomon (Prv 6:6-8; 30:24-25) is probably the harvester ant (Messor semirufus).<\/em> Its granaries are flat chambers connected by galleries irregularly scattered over an area about six feet (1.8 meters) in diameter and about a foot (.3 meter) deep in the ground. Seeds are collected from the ground or picked from plants. The head, or radicle, which is the softest part of the kernel, is bitten off to prevent germination, and the chaff and empty capsules are discarded on kitchen middens (refuse piles) outside the nest. Individual granaries may be 5 inches (12.7 centimeters) in diameter and a half inch (1.2 centimeters) high. Some nests are known to be 40 feet (12 meters) in diameter and 6 to 7 feet (approx. 2 meters) deep with several entrances.<\/p>\nAntelope<\/p>\nSeveral antelope-like creatures are referred to in the Scriptures. One seems to be the white oryx (Oryx leucoryx),<\/em> referred to in Deuteronomy 14:5 (kjv<\/span> “wild ox”; rsv<\/span> “antelope”) and Isaiah 51:20 (kjv<\/span> “wild bull”; RSV <\/span>“antelope”). The oryx was probably the antelope, commonly used for food because its long horns made it relatively easy to catch.<\/p>\nAnother antelope mentioned in the Bible is the addax (Addax nasomaculatus),<\/em> probably the “pygarg” of Deuteronomy 14:5 (kjv<\/span>). It is a native of North Africa with grayish white hinder parts, a white patch on the forehead, and twisted and ringed horns. The word “pygarg” comes from a Greek word meaning “white rump.” The addax is about the size of a donkey. Its body is closely covered with short hair. It has a short mane on the underside of its neck that makes the head look somewhat like that of a goat. The hooves are broad and flat, and the tail resembles that of a donkey. It is common in Africa and in Arabia, where Arabs hunt it with falcons and dogs.<\/p>\nAntelopes are very graceful and run with their heads held high. Both sexes have long, permanent, hollow horns. With the oryx the horns go straight back; addax horns are twisted and ringed. Antelope are alert, wary, and keen sighted. They are usually found in herds of from two to a dozen. If injured or brought to bay, an antelope attacks with its head lowered so that the sharp horns point forward. Antelopes feed on grasses and shrubs, drinking from streams and water holes. When water is scarce, they eat melons and succulent bulbs. Both addax and oryx were ceremonially clean in Jewish law.<\/p>\nApe<\/p>\nPrimate not native to Palestine. The two references to apes in the OT (1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21) refer to their importation by King Solomon with other treasures on board the ships of his mercantile fleet. There is some question concerning the origin of those primates. Some believe that the mention of “ivory” in the same verses suggests they came from East Africa and that they were indeed apes, that is, tailless primates. Others, believing they came from India or Ceylon, suggest that they were actually monkeys. There the baboon (genus Papeio), a large monkey, was considered sacred to the god Thoth. Males of that genus were kept in temples, and the more docile females were often kept as house pets. Such baboons frequently had some of their teeth removed or ground down to lessen the danger of their biting. A number of mummified baboons have been found in Egypt, indicating the high regard in which they were held.<\/p>\nAsp<\/p>\nPoisonous snake. Most biblical references to the asp (Dt 32:33) seem to be to the Egyptian cobra (Naja haje),<\/em> which conceals itself in holes, walls, and rocks and has the ability to expand its neck by raising its anterior ribs so as to enlarge the front of its breast into the shape of a flat disc. Its potent poison can cause death in 30 minutes. It attains a length of about 80 inches (2 meters). The fangs are permanently erect, not movable as in the vipers (the common poisonous snakes of North America; only the coral snake in America has permanently erect fangs). Cobra poison attacks the nervous system, causing muscular paralysis. The Egyptians looked upon it as a sacred creature; they regarded it as a protector since it fed on the rodents that ate their crops. The “fiery serpents” (Nm 21:6; Dt 8:15, both rsv<\/span>) may have been cobras; “fiery” probably refers to the burning fever caused by their venom. Isaiah 14:29 and 30:6 (“flying serpent”) may refer to the hood of the cobra.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\nAss<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Donkey (below).<\/p>\nBadger<\/p>\nSmall hoofed mammal. What the kjv<\/span> calls a “coney,” modern translations name “rock badger” (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7; Ps 104:18; Prv 30:26). The rock badger spoken of in the Bible is probably the Syrian rock hyrax (Hyrax syriaca),<\/em> the only species of hyrax found outside Africa. This small ungulate (having hooflike toenails) lives among rocks from the Dead Sea valley to Mt Hermon. It is strictly a herbivorous (plant-eating) animal about the size of a rabbit. It resembles a guinea pig more than a rabbit, having quite inconspicuous ears and a very small tail. It has broad nails with four toes on its forelegs and three on its hind legs, the toes being connected with skin almost like a web. Pads acting as sucking discs under its feet enable it to keep its footing on slippery rocks. With its yellow and brown fur, it is sometimes called the bear rat because of its resemblance to a tailless rat. It is also equipped with black whiskers that may be seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long.<\/p>\nThese rock badgers, or hyraxes, live together in colonies of from 6 to 50 animals, often sunning themselves on rocks. They are difficult to catch. Guards are posted, and if approaching danger is sighted, the whole group will scurry for cover, warned by the sharp whistles of the guards. Thus they are commended for taking refuge in the rocks (Ps 104:18) and are called wise for making “their houses in the rocks” (Prv 30:24, 26, kjv<\/span>). The badger is not a ruminant (does not chew its cud), but the motion of its jaws may suggest that it chews its cud. That is probably why it was included with other cud-chewing animals in the Jewish food laws (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7). It was forbidden to the Jews as food because it did not have cloven hooves. Some Arabs eat and even prize its meat.<\/p>\nBat<\/p>\nFlying mammals according to modern classification. They have hair and provide milk for their young. The Bible classifies them with other aerial creatures. Bats take shelter in caves, crevices, tree cavities, buildings, and also in exposed places on trees. In colder areas they hibernate or migrate. The normal resting position for a bat is hanging head downward. Bats “swim” through the air rather than fly because they move with their legs as well as with their wings.<\/p>\nThe bat’s thumb is free and terminates in a single hook claw used for climbing and hanging. The hind feet have five toes, all pointing the same way. The large chest accommodates the powerful muscles needed for flying. Because they orient themselves by echo location, the sense of hearing is very well developed.<\/p>\nMost bats are insect eaters, seizing insects in flight. Many insectivorous bats also eat some fruit. Other bats feed exclusively, usually in groups, on fruit and green vegetation. Fruit-eating bats generally live in the tropics where fruit is constantly ripening, although some have been found in the Holy Land. These bats tend to be larger than the insectivores, having a wingspread of up to five feet (1.5 meters).<\/p>\nA third group includes flower-eating bats that feed on pollen and nectar. These small bats with long pointed heads and long tongues are found only in tropical and semitropical regions. Three species of vampire bats, which do not occur in the Holy Land, eat blood by making a small incision and lapping it up. Carnivorous (meat-eating) bats prey on birds, lizards, and frogs. Fish-eating bats catch fish at or near the water surface.<\/p>\nEight varieties of bats are known in the Holy Land. One of them, the little brown bat (genus Myotis<\/em>), is worldwide in its distribution. It is insectivorous and probably has the widest distribution of any nonhuman terrestrial mammal. Brown bats are mostly cave dwellers. The females form maternity colonies that may number in the tens of thousands.<\/p>\nTwo species of mouse-tailed bats (genus Rhinopoma<\/em>) are found in the Holy Land. Their tails are nearly as long as the head and body combined. They are colonial, roosting in caves, rock clefts, wells, pyramids, palaces, and houses. Like the brown bat, they are insectivorous. The slit-faced or hollow-faced bats (genus Nycteris<\/em>) are also found in the Holy Land. They are insectivorous and roost in groups from 6 to 20.<\/p>\nThe bats found in the Holy Land vary in size from that of a mouse to the size of a rat; the largest species measures more than 20 inches (51 centimeters) across the wings. The bat was unclean to the Jews (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\nBear<\/p>\nLarge, heavy, big-headed mammal with short, powerful limbs, a short tail, and small eyes and ears. Bears have a “plantigrade” walk: they walk on both the sole and heel as humans do. The Palestinian bear is a Syrian version of the brown bear (Ursus arctos syriacus).<\/em> It can grow to a height of 6 feet (1.8 meters) and may weigh as much as 500 pounds (227 kilograms).<\/p>\nBears have an excellent sense of smell but less developed senses of sight and hearing. They are omnivorous (eating any kind of food); they subsist largely on vegetation, fruits, insects, and fish.<\/p>\nBears are usually peaceful and inoffensive, but if they think they must defend themselves (Lam 3:10) or their young (2 Sm 17:8; Prv 17:12; Hos 13:8), they may be formidable and dangerous adversaries. David boasted of his role as a bear killer (1 Sm 17:34-37). Since a blow from a bear’s paw can be fatal, David’s courage and strength as a young shepherd in running after a bear and wrenching one of his father’s sheep from its jaws were noteworthy.<\/p>\nSome biblical passages seem to imply that bears attacked for no apparent reason (e.g., Prv 28:15; Am 5:19). At other times they were God’s instruments of punishment, as in the story of Elisha and the two she-bears (2 Kgs 2:24). The bear and the lion, often mentioned together in the Bible (1 Sm 17:37), were the two largest and strongest beasts of prey in the Holy Land. Thus they symbolized both strength and terror (Am 5:19).<\/p>\nIn biblical times bears seem to have roamed all over Palestine. Today they are found only in the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains, and even there they are rare.<\/p>\nBee<\/p>\nOne of two domesticated insects (Apis mellifica),<\/em> the other being the silkworm. Bees gather nectar from flowers, transferring pollen from one flower to another in the process. It is believed that they convey the location of sources of nectar to other bees through a bee “dance,” which may indicate both distance and direction. Bees are sensitive to four colors: blue-green, yellow-green, blue-violet, and ultra-violet (invisible to humans).<\/p>\nThe wild bees of the Holy Land are especially noted for their ferocity in attack. Only the female “worker” bees sting people and animals, the virulence of their venom increasing in warm weather. A number of biblical passages allude to the irritable, vindictive nature of bees and to the painful stings they inflict (Dt 1:44; Ps 118:12; Is 7:18).<\/p>\nOne reference calls attention to the fact that in semidesert regions a dead animal’s carcass, stripped to the bone by jackals or vultures and dried in the sun, can provide wild bees an excellent place to start a new colony (Jgs 14:5-9).<\/p>\nThe Egyptians considered the bee sacred. In ancient Greece candles were made from beeswax. In the Holy Land, beekeeping was probably not practiced until the Hellenistic period (second century BC<\/span>), although Ezekiel 27:17 suggests that it may have been practiced earlier. If domestic honey was not available to the Hebrews, wild honey certainly was, and travelers would be on the lookout for caches of honey in rocky clefts and other likely places. The Philistines and the Hittites practiced beekeeping in their cities.<\/p>\nThe Bible contains many references to bees and bee products. A bee swarm was a valuable asset, though the price of honey itself was low. Honey was sometimes eaten with the honeycomb (Sg 5:1). Honey also had uses other than food, e.g., in embalming.<\/p>\nThe land of Israel was described as a land flowing with milk and honey. Honey was a major source of sweetening in the ancient Near East—hence, its importance (cf. Jgs 14:8-9). Actually the Hebrew word for “honey” may include not only bee honey but also the sweet syrup extracted from such fruits as figs, dates, and grapes. Thus “a land flowing with milk and honey” (Ex 3:8, rsv<\/span>) does not necessarily stand for a land of bees but for a land rich in sweetness.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Honey.<\/p>\nBehemoth<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Hippopotamus (below).<\/p>\nCamel<\/p>\nLarge beast of burden. Unintelligent, ill-natured, and quarrelsome, the camel (Camelus dromedarius)<\/em> is nevertheless a blessing to people living in the desert and on its borders because it is especially adapted to that habitat. It has been called the ship of the desert. Having thick elastic pads of fibrous tissue on its feet, it can walk on hot desert sands. It can go without water for long periods and can subsist on vegetation growing on the saline soils. The camel’s nostrils are pinched together and can be closed at will to prevent penetration of sand during violent sandstorms.<\/p>\nCamels are used for transporting both goods and people. A person riding a camel can cover from 60 to 75 miles (96.5 to 121 kilometers) in a day. A camel can carry a load weighing 600 pounds (272 kilograms) or more. Camels were used heavily in the spice trade (Gn 37:25) and traveled regularly in camel trains between Arabia, Egypt, and Assyria. They were also ridden in time of war (Jgs 6:5). A camel can even be hitched to a plow in areas where the land is cultivated.<\/p>\nThe hair shed by camels during the early spring is preserved and used in weaving cloth and making tents. As much as 10 pounds (4.5 kilograms) of hair can be obtained from one camel. A rough cloak of camel’s hair, as worn by John the Baptist (Mt 3:4), is still worn by Bedouins today. A camel’s hair garment was also the sign of the prophetic office (Zec 13:4).<\/p>\nTwo varieties of camel occur within the one-humped species, the slow burden-bearing camel referred to in Genesis 37:25 and the fast dromedary of 1 Samuel 30:17. The dromedary can stand seven feet (2.1 meters) tall and measure as much as nine feet (2.7 meters) from the muzzle to the tip of the tail. With its three-chambered stomach, which can hold from 15 to 30 quarts (14.2 to 28.4 liters) of liquid, it can go for as long as 5 days during the summer or 25 days in winter without drinking. The camel’s hump is a reserve store of fat, making it possible for the animal to subsist on very little food during a desert journey.<\/p>\nAnother species of camel, the Bactrian camel (Camelus bactrianus),<\/em> is also resident in the Holy Land. It has two humps. It is heavier, bigger, and has longer hair than the one-humped camel and is slower than the swift dromedary. Isaiah 21:7 may refer to the Bactrian camel; both kinds of camel are referred to in Esther 8:10 (kjv<\/span>). Camels ranked in importance with sheep, cattle, and asses in OT times. A third of the 66 biblical references to the camel lists it with other animals.<\/p>\nCamels are ruminants (cud-chewing mammals) but do not have cloven hooves. Thus, they were included in the list of unclean beasts, forbidden by the Israelites as food (Lv 11:4; Dt 14:7). They are eaten by Arabs, however, who also drink their milk (cf. Gn 32:15).<\/p>\nAbraham had camels in Egypt (Gn 12:16). At first Job had 3,000 camels (Jb 1:3) and after his recovery, 6,000 (Jb 42:12). Although wide use of camels does not seem to have begun until shortly before 1000 BC<\/span> (Jgs 6:5), Sumerian texts from the Old Babylonian period list camels and indicate that they had been domesticated. Camel bones and figurines have been found at various eastern archaeological sites dating from well before 1200 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\nCaterpillar<\/p>\nLarval stage of insects characterized by complete metamorphosis. Such insects pass through four stages: egg, larva or caterpillar, pupa, and adult. Bees, flies, moths, and butterflies all pass through a larval or caterpillar stage.<\/p>\nThe word “caterpillar” occurs three times in the nlt<\/span> (1 Kgs 8:37; 2 Chr 6:28; Ps 78:46). In the book of Joel that same Hebrew word is translated “locust” (1:4; 2:25, nlt<\/span>). The locust and grasshopper to which the Hebrew word refers have an incomplete type of metamorphosis with only three stages: egg, nymph, and adult. The nymph is a miniature adult in which the wings are not fully developed, though their outline may be present. There are several nymph stages known as instars. The reference is to one of the last instars, in which the wing structures are still folded together and enclosed in a sac but are nevertheless clearly recognizable. That form of the insect is about an inch (2.5 centimeters) long.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\nCattle<\/p>\nDomestic animals of the bovine species (Bos primigenius).<\/em> The OT often emphasized the beauty of cattle. Egypt was rich in cattle, especially in the Nile River delta area (Goshen), where the Hebrews settled under Joseph.<\/p>\nSome scholars believe that milk rather than meat was the foremost consideration in the domestication of cattle and that in early civilizations meat supplies came chiefly from wild game. Cattle also supplied strong hides that supplanted wood in the manufacture of shields. Their dung was a source of fuel when wood was scarce (Ez 4:15). They were used as beasts of burden and for plowing. Development of wheeled transportation was associated more closely with cattle than with any other animal.<\/p>\nThe biblical term “cattle” often refers to all domesticated animals or livestock (Gn 1:24; 2:20; 7:23; 47:6, 16-17; Ex 9:3-7; Nm 3:41, 45). Occasionally, the term was used to refer to all large domestic animals (Nm 31:9; 32:26), although sometimes the word as used in the kjv<\/span> refers only to sheep and goats (Gn 30:32, 39, 43; 31:8, 10; Is 7:25; 43:23).<\/p>\nProbably several kinds of cattle were domesticated in the Holy Land. Small, short-legged, black or brown shorthorn cattle were found in the southern part of Judah; that type submitted easily to the yoke and was prominent in agricultural operations. Along the coast a larger variety was found, and the wild districts east of the Jordan River were populated with a breed of huge black cattle.<\/p>\nCattle breeding was widely practiced by the patriarchs (cf. Gn 32:15; Jb 21:10). Strict laws in Mesopotamia, as well as in Israel, penalized the owner of a bull that gored a man or other cattle (Ex 21:28-36). Bulls were sometimes employed figuratively as pictures of strength or violence (Dt 33:17; Pss 22:12; 68:30; Is 10:13). For breeding purposes one bull is normally adequate for about 30 cows, but many more were kept since bulls were widely used in Israel for sacrifices. They might be used as a general sacrifice (Lv 22:23; Nm 23:1) or for special sacrifices (Jgs 6:25; 1 Sm 1:24). Particular sacrifices were offered at the consecration of priests (Ex 29:1), consecration of an altar (Nm 7), purification of the Levites (Nm 8), sin offerings (Lv 16), day of the new moon (Nm 28:11-14), Passover (Nm 28:19), Feast of Weeks (Nm 28:27), Feast of Trumpets (Nm 29:1-2), Day of Atonement (Nm 29:7-9), and the Feast of Tabernacles (Nm 29:12-38). The Feast of Tabernacles required the largest number of bulls for burnt offerings of all the annual feasts, with a total of 71 being slaughtered during the course of eight days.<\/p>\nCalves were sometimes referred to as “sons of the herd” in the original Hebrew (Gn 18:8; 1 Sm 6:7; 14:32). The calf, a symbol of peacefulness (Is 11:6), was also used figuratively to refer to the weak (Ps 68:30). A calf’s head decorated the back of Solomon’s throne (1 Kgs 10:19). Calves were sometimes fattened in stalls to keep them from running off weight in the field (Am 6:4; Mal 4:2; Lk 15:23) or were kept around the house; the witch of Endor kept a calf in her house that she killed and served to Saul and his men (1 Sm 28:24-25). Calves supplied veal (Gn 18:7), considered a delicacy by the wealthy; Amos referred to stall-fattened calves in a denunciation of luxurious and careless living (Am 6:4). Calves also supplied meat for all Saul’s armies at the great slaughter of the Philistines (1 Sm 14:32). The “fatted calf” served roasted or boiled was gourmet fare, suitable for the finest banquet (Gn 18:7; Mt 22:4; Lk 15:23).<\/p>\nCattle were subject to the law of firstlings (Ex 13:12). They were a mark of wealth (Gn 13:2) and were considered proper booty of war (Jos 8:2). Aaron, the first high priest, made a golden calf as a rival to the ark of the covenant (Ex 32; Dt 9:16, 21). Even though he represented the calf as an image of the invisible God, it was especially offensive because the calf was a fertility symbol related to Egyptian and Canaanite practices. Two calves were later made by Jeroboam I of Israel (930–909 BC<\/span>) for his shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:28-33). Hosea’s prophetic denunciations of calf worship were directed at those shrines (Hos 8:5-6; 13:2).<\/p>\nAn ox is an adult castrated bull. A steer is a young ox. Oxen were used to do work (Nm 7:3; Dt 22:10; 25:4), though for moving heavy objects, cows were typically favored over bulls because of their more docile nature. Oxen were also used as pack animals (1 Chr 12:40, although they did not have the endurance of the ass, camel, or mule. They usually fed on grass (Nm 22:4; Ps 106:20), but they also ate straw (Is 11:7) and salted fodder (Is 30:24) and could be kept in a stable (Lk 13:15). Oxen could not be offered as sacrifices because they had been castrated (Lv 22:24). They could be used for food but were rarely eaten. Possession of an ox and an ass was regarded as the bare minimum for existence in the ancient Palestinian agriculture economy (Jb 24:3; cf. Ex 20:17).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Agriculture; Food and Food Preparation; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\nChameleon<\/p>\nLizard characterized by its ability to change color according to its surroundings (Chameleon vulgaris).<\/em> To the Israelites the chameleon was ritually unclean (Lv 11:30). The Hebrew word for chameleon is derived from a word meaning “to pant.” A lizard’s lungs are very large, and in ancient times lizards were believed to live on air. A chameleon’s eyes move independently of each other; so at times one eye may be turned upward and the other downward. Chameleons live in trees and bushes, clinging to branches with their long tails.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\nCoral<\/p>\nCalcareous (lime-containing) skeletons of relatively simple marine organisms (Corallium rubrum).<\/em> Red coral from the Mediterranean and Red Seas is widely used for jewelry and for medicinal purposes. While the animal is alive, the coral is green in color and shrublike in appearance, looking rather like an underwater plant since the coral animals are immobil. When the coral is removed from the water, it becomes hard and red in color.<\/p>\nIn ancient times coral was sometimes used as money, along with precious stones, pearls, and gold. Some believe the biblical reference in Lamentations 4:7 (rsv<\/span>) is to pearls rather than to coral, but it is probable that the references in Job 28:18 and Ezekiel 27:16 are to the red coral (see nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nCricket<\/p>\nInsect of the order Orthptera related to grasshoppers and locusts. According to Leviticus 11:22, the cricket was edible. The reference may be to one of the growth stages of the locust.<\/p>\nThe kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word as “beetle.” Beetles are insects with chewing mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the fore pair being hard and sheathlike and the hind pair being membranous and folded under the fore pair. Some beetles are carnivorous, others are chiefly herbivorous. Some are aquatic, some produce a secretion that blisters the skin, some damage fabrics, some damage crops, and some feed on other insects that are harmful to humans. In ancient Egypt the beetle, or sacred scarab, was a symbol of the sun god Ra. Scarab seals and amulets were extremely popular in Egypt.<\/p>\nCrocodile<\/p>\nLargest of all existing reptiles (Crocodilus vulgaris),<\/em> attaining a length of well over 20 feet (6 meters). Crocodiles are characterized by large lizardlike bodies supported by short legs. The head terminates in a flattened snout armed with strong conical teeth, each of which is implanted in a distinct socket. New teeth growing from beneath continually replace those in use. The toes are webbed. The back and tail are protected by quadrangular horny shields of varying sizes arranged in regular rows and in contact with one another at the edges. The eyes are covered with movable lids that can be closed when the animal enters the water.<\/p>\nThe crocodile spends most of its time in the water where it feeds mainly on fish but also on aquatic birds and even small animals that come down to the water’s edge to drink. It is surprisingly fast and agile on dry land, even though its legs are so short that its belly and tail drag across the earth leaving a distinct path.<\/p>\nUntil the beginning of the 20th century, the crocodile was found in the marshes and small coastal rivers of western Palestine. A first-century Roman writer, Pliny, referred to a place in the Holy Land called Crocodeilopolis (“crocodile city”) to the south of Mt Carmel, and visitors to the Holy Land as late as the 19th century reported seeing crocodiles in that general region.<\/p>\nThe description of “Leviathan” in Job 41 seems to be based on the crocodile (thus the translation of the nlt<\/span>). The “dragon” of Ezekiel 29:3, used figuratively of the Egyptian pharaoh, may be a reference to the crocodile.<\/p>\nDeer<\/p>\nLarge ruminant (cud-chewing) animals. Only the males have antlers (branching horns). Deer antlers grow annually and are solid, in contrast to those of the antelope and the gazelle. Fully developed antlers are devoid of any covering of skin or horn and, for all practical purposes, may be regarded as a mass of dead bone carried for a certain time by the living animal.<\/p>\nThe end of the deer’s muzzle is naked in all species. The stomach is divided into a series of compartments, some of which are used to store partly chewed food. The food is later regurgitated, rechewed, and finally swallowed into a section of the stomach where true digestion takes place.<\/p>\nThree species of deer were known in Palestine: the red deer (Cervus elaphus),<\/em> the Persian fallow deer (Dama mesopotamica),<\/em> and the roe deer (Capreolus capreolus).<\/em> All are now extinct there. The last deer were hunted in the Holy Land in 1914. The red deer referred to in the Bible as “hart” (male), “stag” (male), or “hind” (female) stood about four feet (1.2 meters) high at the shoulder. It was gregarious (living in herds or flocks), each group remaining in a definite territory. Red deer grazed and browsed during the morning and late afternoon (Lam 1:6). The sexes remained in separate herds. The red deer was known for its leaping (Is 35:6) and sure-footedness in the mountains (Ps 18:33; Sg 2:8-9, 17; 8:14; Hb 3:19).<\/p>\nThe antlers of the Persian fallow deer (1 Kgs 4:23) were large, flattened, and palmated (shaped like an open palm with fingers extended), and its coat was a yellowbrown. It traveled in small groups, feeding mainly on grass in the morning and evening.<\/p>\nThe roe deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23) was a small, graceful animal, dark reddish brown in summer and yellowish gray in winter. Its antlers were about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long and had three points. The roe deer preferred sparsely wooded valleys and the lower slopes of mountains, grazing in open grasslands. It usually associated in family groups made up of the doe and her offspring. They were shy, yet very curious. The roe deer barked like a dog when disturbed, and they were excellent swimmers.<\/p>\nThere is some question as to whether the roe deer is actually referred to in such passages as 1 Kings 4:23; references may be to the fallow deer, although that animal does not seem to have lived in the southern part of Palestine around the Sinai Desert because of its need for ample amounts of food and water. Fallow deer were found in northern Palestine.<\/p>\nThe hart (the male red deer) was listed among the clean beasts that Jewish law permitted as food (Dt 12:15, 22; 14:5), but deer were not listed among the animals appropriate for sacrifice. The hind (female red deer) normally gave birth to one calf at a time, though twins were born with some degree of regularity (Jb 39:1; Ps 29:9, kjv<\/span>; Jer 14:5). The gestation period was about 40 weeks. When it was about to give birth, the hind looked for a secure hiding place, preferably in the dense undergrowth of the forest where it could find natural protection for the tiny calf. During the first few days after birth, the mother never went far from her young. The fawn was able to stand on its own legs a few hours after birth. The solicitous care by the hind for her calf during the first days of its life is hinted at in a touching way in Jeremiah 14:4-5, where only a severe drought is said to drive the hind from her calf. Job 39:1-4 describes the calving of the hinds. The hind illustrated grace and charm (Gn 49:21; Prv 5:19), and its dark, gentle eyes and graceful limbs were used to describe the beauty of a woman (Prv 5:18-19).<\/p>\nDog<\/p>\nProbably the earliest domesticated animal (Canis familiaris),<\/em> used very early in hunting. The modern dog is believed to have come from the Indian wolf (Canis lupus pallipes).<\/em> The dogs of biblical times probably looked like a modern German shepherd, with short pointed ears, a pointed nose, and a long tail.<\/p>\nThe dog was generally looked down upon in biblical times (Prv 26:11; 2 Pt 2:22). The biblical writers did not share modern sentiments about dogs being man’s best friends. The dog was pictured as a scavenger, haunting streets and dumps (Ex 22:31; 1 Kgs 22:38; Mt 15:26; Lk 16:21). Human corpses could become the spoil of dogs (2 Kgs 9:35-36). In general, dogs served the same function as vultures and other birds of prey. Most of the 41 references in the Scriptures to dogs show strong disfavor. Dogs were considered cowardly, filthy creatures.<\/p>\nDogs used in hunting occur in paintings in Egyptian tombs, and there is a reference to dogs herding sheep in Job 30:1. One good quality of dogs highly esteemed by the Israelites was watchfulness (Is 56:10). In general, however, in biblical times “dog” was a term of contempt (1 Sm 17:43; 2 Sm 16:9) and was used of overly submissive persons (2 Sm 9:8; 2 Kgs 8:13) and of evil persons (Is 56:10-11; Mt 7:6; Phil 3:2; Rv 22:15).<\/p>\nDogs, like pigs, were voracious and omnivorous (eating any kind of food). In response to a Gentile woman’s request that he heal her daughter, Jesus used the metaphor of throwing household food scraps to dogs (Mt 15:22-28; Mk 7:25-30). At the time of Jesus, the word “dog” was a standard Jewish term of contempt for Gentiles who, like dogs, were considered unclean, although the diminutive form of the word, used by Jesus, softened this considerably. Seeing her faith, Jesus granted the woman’s request, giving a non-Jew some of “the children’s bread.”<\/p>\nDonkey<\/p>\nBeast of burden. The donkey of the Holy Land (Equus asinus)<\/em> was quite different from the European donkey of today, which is usually a small, stubborn animal. In biblical times the donkey was a beautiful, stately, friendly animal. Its color was usually reddish brown. Three wild races have been described, all from Africa. The race from northwest Africa is extinct; the one from northeast Africa, if not extinct, is close to extinction; the Somalian race, which survives, did not play an important part in domestication. The northeast African race, the Nubian donkey, was evidently domesticated in the Nile River region in early historic times. The donkey was used as a mount from the time of domestication on. It is first mentioned in the Bible among the animals that Abraham acquired in Egypt (Gn 12:16). The donkey was primarily a beast of burden, driven but not bridled. From the time of the Middle Kingdom on (c. 2040 BC<\/span>), it was used for riding in Egypt, but only the Jews and Nubians rode donkeys regularly. The donkey was also used for threshing grain and for pulling the plow. In Arab countries today peasants plow with a donkey and a cow or camel hitched together. In Israel the law forbade plowing with a donkey and an ox hitched together (Dt 22:10). Until the time of Solomon (960 BC<\/span>), horses were not used in Palestine. From that time on, the horse was ridden by warriors; the donkey was used by those who were traveling peaceably.<\/p>\nThe donkey was held in high regard by the Jews and was considered an economic asset. An individual had to have a donkey for minimum existence (Jb 24:3), and wealth was frequently counted by the number of donkeys one possessed (Gn 12:16; 24:35). The donkey was considered an acceptable gift (Gn 32:13-15). It was allowed to rest on the Sabbath (Dt 5:14). Women in biblical times often used the donkey as a riding animal (Jos 15:18; 1 Sm 25:23; 2 Kgs 4:24); often a special driver would help a woman guide the animal, running along at its side. If a married couple possessed only one donkey, the husband usually walked alongside while the wife rode (Ex 4:20).<\/p>\nThe people of Israel returning from Babylon had ten times as many donkeys as horses and camels (Ezr 2:66-67; Neh 7:68-69). Job’s wealth was indicated by the fact that he had 500 she-donkeys before catastrophe hit him (Jb 1:3); after his recovery he had 1,000 donkeys (Jb 42:12). Joseph’s brothers used donkeys to transport the grain they purchased in Egypt (Gn 42:26; 43:24). Abigail transported food on donkeys to David and his troops during their conflict with Saul (1 Sm 25:18). David assigned one of the 12 managers of his royal estates to look after his donkeys exclusively (1 Chr 27:30).<\/p>\nThe onager, or Syrian wild donkey (Equus hemionus hemihippus)<\/em>, is an intermediate between the true horse and the true donkey. Its ears are longer than those of a horse but shorter than those of a donkey. The front hooves are narrow; there are chestnuts (callouslike spots on the inside of the knees) on the front legs only, and the tail is short haired for a long distance from its root so that it appears to be tufted.<\/p>\nThe Sumerians (ancient Mesopotamians) were able to domesticate the onager, which was eventually replaced by the horse. It was used to draw chariots in Ur; a number of onagers were buried with their vehicles in a royal grave that dates from about 2500 BC<\/span>. Later the wild onager was a favorite hunter’s prize for Babylonian and Assyrian kings.<\/p>\nThe onager was very common in the steppe lands near Israel, where it was described as a freedom-loving desert animal (Jb 24:5; 39:5-8; Ps 104:11; Is 32:14; Jer 2:24; Hos 8:9). Ishmael was described as “free and untamed as a wild donkey” (Gn 16:12, nlt<\/span>)—that is, one who could not adjust to domestic life. Drought seems to have been responsible for the population decline of the onager in biblical times (Jer 14:6). The modern onager (Equus hemionus onager)<\/em> is slightly larger than the Syrian wild donkey that is extinct.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\nDragon<\/p>\nAny one of a number of monstrous land and sea creatures. In biblical usage, “dragon” does not refer to the huge, fire-breathing, winged reptile of European folklore. The translators of the kjv<\/span> used the term to translate two Hebrew words that are usually rendered more precisely in modern translations. One word referred to desert animals; most scholars agree with the niv<\/span> that “jackals” is its proper meaning (Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; Jer 9:11; Mal 1:3). See<\/em> Jackal (below).<\/p>\nThe other Hebrew word translated “dragon” is harder to define. It was frequently used in reference to serpents (so translated in the rsv<\/span>: Ex 7:9-12; Dt 32:33; Ps 91:13). In other rsv<\/span> passages it is translated “sea monster” (Gn 1:21; Jb 7:12; Ps 148:7). The exact identity of such sea monsters is not known. Several rsv<\/span> passages retain the English “dragon.” In two of them (Ps 74:13; Is 27:1), the context indicates that sea monsters are meant. In three others (Is 51:9; Ez 29:3; 32:2) “dragon” seems to refer to the crocodile, a figurative reference to the Egyptian pharaoh at the time of the exodus. Jeremiah 51:34 (translated “monster” in the rsv<\/span>) may also refer to a voracious creature such as a crocodile. See<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\nBabylonian myths described monsters and dragons in primordial conflict with the god Marduk; they represented the principle of evil. In its figurative usages in Scripture, “dragon” has a similar significance, especially in the prophetic books. In the book of Revelation it is a symbol of Satan, the archenemy of God and his people (Rv 12:3-17; 13:2, 4, 11; 16:13; 20:2).<\/p>\nFish<\/p>\nAquatic animals frequently mentioned in the Bible without names or descriptions that enable us to identify the particular species. Since time immemorial, fish have constituted one of the staple foods of humanity, and they still serve as the chief source of protein in many parts of the world. The trade in fish was highly developed in biblical times. For example, one of the gates in Jerusalem was called the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3; Zep 1:10). The law in Leviticus 11:9-12 permitted the Jews to eat fish, but only those having both fins and scales. Scaleless fish such as catfish were forbidden, even though they had fins.<\/p>\nEgyptian paintings depict various methods of fishing, and the Philistines fished in the Mediterranean Sea. Since the people of Israel were not a seafaring nation, it is safe to assume that most of their fish came from freshwater lakes and rivers, especially the Sea of Galilee. Some 36 species of fish have been identified in that lake, including varieties of perch, carp, barbel, “sardine,” and catfish.<\/p>\nThe method of fishing characteristic of NT times was the dragnet. After a boat had put out into the deep (Lk 5:4), a large net would be thrown out from it and then dragged toward shore by the rowers in the boat, possibly with the help of a crew in another boat. The catch was sorted out on shore (Mt 13:47-48). Fishing was usually carried out at night when the coolness of the water brought fish closer to the surface and when they could not see the approaching nets.<\/p>\nThe Jews also fished by hook and line (Mt 17:27), a few by spear (Jb 41:7), and some by the throw net (Ez 47:10). Habakkuk refers to hook-and-line fishing, netting, and seining (1:15).<\/p>\nVery early in the history of the Christian church the fish became a symbol for Christ and the faith. It was scratched on the walls of Roman catacombs and may be seen today decorating walls, altars, pews, and vestments. The symbol came into use because the Greek word for “fish” (<\/em>ichthus<\/span>)<\/em> is composed of the first letter of each word in the Greek phrase “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior.” See<\/em> Whale (below).<\/p>\nFlea<\/p>\nTiny, irritating insect (1 Sm 24:14; 26:20, nlt<\/span>). Many species of fleas occur in Palestine, the most common being Pulex irritans.<\/em> About a thousand species are known around the world. Fleas are wingless parasites that have sharp jaws and suck out blood from the bodies of humans and animals. The body is wedge shaped, enabling the flea to burrow into folds of skin and hide there. The eggs, laid by the female in dust heaps in the corners of rooms, hatch into small, white larvae that pupate (a nonfeeding stage) in a cocoon. Soon adult fleas appear that immediately attach themselves to the body of a host. The female requires blood for the development of her eggs.<\/p>\nA flea bite is painful and causes some swelling and itching. Fleas are attracted by warmth. With favorable moisture and temperature, adult fleas can live a year or longer without food, but they are voracious feeders. The most dangerous fleas are those of the rat that transmit the organism responsible for bubonic plague. There were 41 recorded epidemics of bubonic plague before the Christian era.<\/p>\nFly<\/p>\nInsects of the order Diptera, which have one pair of wings. Many winged insects of other orders, however, are also called flies, such as the dragonfly or butterfly.<\/p>\nAs in almost all parts of the world, flies are abundant in Palestine. One of the most numerous is the common housefly (Musca domestica),<\/em> found chiefly around dung heaps and garbage. The female lays her eggs, out of which emerge white maggots that feed on refuse. After a few days the maggot develops into a cocoon out of which emerges the adult housefly. In the summer the whole cycle lasts about 12 days, so that a fly can breed about 20 generations a year.<\/p>\nAnother fly common to Palestine is the botfly (family Oestridae). It causes much discomfort among livestock by irritating them and spreading diseases. Tabanid flies (family Tabanidae), including the horsefly (genus Tabanus<\/em>) and related species, are also found in Palestine. Both the botfly and horsefly are known as gadflies because of the persistent distress they inflict. Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar is spoken of as a gadfly in view of his invasion of Egypt (Jer 46:20).<\/p>\nThe fourth plague in Egypt just before the exodus featured “swarms of flies” (Ex 8:21-31, nlt<\/span>; cf. Pss 78:45; 105:31). Those swarms may have been made up of any or all the flies mentioned above. The maggots mentioned in Job 25:6 and Isaiah 14:11 and the worms in Exodus 16:24 and Job 7:5 and 17:14 were probably fly larvae.<\/p>\nA proverb quoted in Ecclesiastes 10:1 probably refers to the housefly, which would be attracted to an open, perfumed ointment bottle. Once inside it would drown and eventually decay, causing the ointment to spoil and stink. The fly is also referred to in Isaiah 7:18 where it symbolizes Egypt. Isaiah may have had in mind a horsefly (Tabanus arenivagus)<\/em> that attacks both humans and animals.<\/p>\nPhilistine inhabitants of the city of Ekron worshiped a god named Baal-zebul, meaning “Lord of the high places.” The Hebrews mockingly spoke of Baal-zebub, meaning “Lord of the flies” (2 Kgs 1:2). The NT form is Beelzebub (e.g., Mt 10:25; 12:24, 27).<\/p>\nFox<\/p>\nSmall, doglike carnivore with a bushy tail that is about half its body length. The red fox of the Holy Land (Vulpes palaetinae)<\/em> is similar to the North American red fox; it is smaller than a wolf and is normally a nocturnal solitary animal. The omnivorous fox eats almost any kind of food—fruits, plants, mice, beetles, and birds—but seldom touches carrion. It loves the sweet juice of grapes, but it also burrows underground tunnels that can destroy the vines (Sg 2:15). The fox is intelligent and known for its slyness (Lk 13:32). It has considerable endurance and can run at speeds up to 30 miles (48 kilometers) per hour. The Jews rebuilding Jerusalem’s wall were taunted by the wisecrack that even a fox jumping on their wall would knock it over (Neh 4:3).<\/p>\nThe Egyptian fox (Vulpes niloticus)<\/em> is found in the central and southern parts of the Holy Land. It is somewhat smaller than the common red fox. Its back is rust colored and its belly light. The Syrian fox (Vulpes flavescens)<\/em> that lives in the northern part of the Holy Land is shiny gold in color.<\/p>\nSome OT references such as Psalm 63:10 and Lamentations 5:18 are translated “fox” in the kjv<\/span> but probably refer to jackals. Jackals, not foxes, hunt in packs and tend to act as scavengers.<\/p>\nFrog<\/p>\nAmphibian (genus Rana<\/em>), living part of its life in the water and part on land.<\/p>\nFrogs and toads are covered with soft, hairless skin and lack a tail in the adult stage. The hind legs are much longer and more powerfully developed than the forelegs so that the animals are able to jump large distances. It has been suggested that the frog referred to in Scripture is an edible one, Rana ridibunda,<\/em> one of the aquatic frogs found in Egypt and in the stagnant waters of the Holy Land.<\/p>\nThe female frog lays her eggs in the water; after about a week the eggs hatch into tadpoles. Gradually through metamorphosis the tail is lost and limbs are acquired. Frogs must maintain a moist skin since they take oxygen through the skin as well as through their lungs; thus they must always remain close to water. They feed on insects and worms.<\/p>\nFrogs are found throughout the Palestinian lowlands, where their croaking is heard in the spring and on summer evenings. The Israelites seem to have associated frogs primarily with sliminess and foulness. They fell into the category of creeping or swarming creatures, which in general were ritually unclean (Lv 11:29-31). Since the frog was not specifically listed, however, rabbis did not consider it one of the animals that defiled human beings through contact.<\/p>\nIn Revelation 16:13 certain foul spirits are said to look like frogs. The ancient Egyptians made the frog a symbol of life and birth and an image of Heqet, the patron goddess of birth. She is depicted with a frog’s head giving life to the newborn. Thus that deity was discredited when the power of God afflicted Egypt in the second of the ten plagues on the Egyptians with the very animal that was her symbol (Ex 8:1-14; Pss 78:45; 105:30). The frog in question may have been the spotted frog of Egypt (Rana punctata,<\/em> or Rana ridibunda).<\/em><\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\nGazelle<\/p>\nSmall, dainty, graceful antelope with hollow recurved horns on both sexes. Two varieties exist in the Holy Land, the dorcas gazelle (Gazella dorcas),<\/em> which is pale fawn in color and up to 22 inches (56 centimeters) tall, and the Arabian gazelle (Gazella arabica),<\/em> which is a dark smoky color and up to 25 inches (63.5 centimeters) tall.<\/p>\nGazelles are still quite common throughout the desert and steppe areas of the Holy Land, especially in the Negev Desert. Herds usually consist of from 5 to 10 animals, but some varieties assemble in large migratory herds in the fall to relocate to lower elevations and new feeding grounds. Gazelles are herbivorous (plant eating). They are very shy and post guards to warn the herd of approaching danger.<\/p>\nIn biblical times the gazelle was probably the game animal most hunted by the Jews (Prv 6:5; Is 13:14). Pharaoh Tutankhamen hunted gazelles and ostriches. The gazelle is said to have graced Solomon’s table (1 Kgs 4:23). Gazelles were not easy to catch because of their great speed (2 Sm 2:18; 1 Chr 12:8; Prv 6:5); they surpass the deer in swiftness. They were trapped in various ways—encircled with nets, driven into enclosures with pitfalls, or forced into narrow valleys and shot with arrows. The Bedouin hunt gazelle with falcons and dogs; the falcon annoys the gazelle, striking it on the head and injuring it so that the dogs can overtake it.<\/p>\nThe gazelle is referred to in Song of Songs 2:9, 17; 4:5; 7:3; 8:14, where it is an image of feminine beauty.<\/p>\nGecko<\/p>\nReptile of the family Gekkonidae, referred to in Leviticus 11:30. In Jewish food law it was a ritually unclean lizard. There are seven species of geckos in the Holy Land (including Hemidactylus turcicus<\/em> and Ptyodactylus hasselquistii,<\/em> all insectivorous—insect eating). The gecko makes a low mourning sound by vibrating its tongue rapidly against the roof of its mouth. In legend the gecko was said to cause leprosy by crawling across a person’s body.<\/p>\nAnother name for the gecko is the wall lizard, so named because it can walk upside down on ceilings with the aid of the suction discs on its toes—but it often plops down into the middle of the home. Since it was considered unclean, such an intrusion would have been a disgusting nuisance to Jewish households (Lv 11:31-38).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\nGnat<\/p>\nAny very small fly, in common and biblical usage. According to the nlt<\/span>, the third plague in Egypt before the exodus consisted of gnats (Ex 8:16-18; Ps 105:31). The kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word there as “lice,” but the breeding pattern described in Exodus 8—insects rising from the dust—seems to fit gnats better than lice. Since “gnat” is a general term, the small flies of that plague may have included several small species such as mosquitos, harvester gnats, midges, or sand flies.<\/p>\nThe sand fly inflicts a far more painful bite than the mosquito. Further, it does not betray itself by a buzzing noise in flight and is so small that it penetrates most mosquito netting.<\/p>\nGnats were drawn to wine while it was fermenting. The Pharisees in particular would strain their wine to avoid consuming unclean insects (Mt 23:24).<\/p>\nGoat<\/p>\nCloven-hooved mammals (genus Capra<\/em>) with large eyes and big, floppy ears that constantly twitch. Both males and females have backward arching horns. The Palestinian goat is a ruminant (cud-chewing animal) of lighter build than the sheep.<\/p>\nThe goat was probably the earliest ruminant to be domesticated. Its wild ancestor seems to have been the Gezoar goat (Capra aegagrus).<\/em> Wild goats are believed to have been domesticated very early in Palestine. The goat of Bible times was probably the Syrian or Mamber variety (Capra hircus mambrica).<\/em> Domesticated goats may have as many as four kids in a litter, whereas wild goats bear only one or two.<\/p>\nThe Palestinian goat was commonly black. Speckled and spotted goats were a rarity, and for that reason Jacob’s request for those goats in Genesis 30:32 appeared very modest. There may also have been red goats (cf. 1 Sm 16:12; 19:13, where goat’s hair was used to imitate David’s hair, which was “ruddy” or auburn).<\/p>\nAlmost every part of the goat was used by the Israelites. The whole goat was used for sacrifice. Its flesh served as meat (Lv 7:23; Dt 14:4), and it was the principal source of milk (Prv 27:27). Goats were sheared in the late spring, and the goat hair was used for weaving tent cloth and for various domestic purposes (Ex 36:14; 1 Sm 19:13, 16). The tabernacle at Mt Sinai was made of goat’s hair blankets (Ex 26:7).<\/p>\nAdult male goats were generally not eaten because of their strong flavor and toughness and also because they were necessary to insure the flock’s increase. Young kids, however, were usually the chief meat for a feast and were offered to visitors as a symbol of hospitality. Goat milk is richer than the milk of cows and sheep and evidently had broader uses. A good goat gives three quarts of milk a day, from which a rich butter and buttermilk can be made. The average Hebrew family could have lived almost entirely on a single goat’s production.<\/p>\nGoatskin was tanned as leather, and the whole hide was turned into a skin bottle by sewing shut leg and neck apertures (Gn 21:14; Jos 9:4). Goatskin had many uses, including the construction of Hebrew musical instruments. The nebal, a large harp, was made with goatskin for its base sound. Drums had goatskin coverings.<\/p>\nGoats were herded with sheep in biblical times, but each group remained separate following its own bell-laden leader. Jesus was evidently referring to their common herding in his description of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\nBecause of their wool, sheep are valued more than goats. However, where pasture and water are scarce and thorny shrubs dominate over grass, sheep are difficult to keep and goats become important. They can live under conditions that suit neither cows nor sheep, producing large quantities of milk. The goat does not supply fat as the sheep does, and since its hair is coarse its wool is rather scarce. Goat-hair cloth called cilicium was used to make tents.<\/p>\nGoats have voracious appetites. They also were responsible for much damage done to the land of Palestine, breaking down terraces, destroying forests, and bringing about soil erosion by eating off all cover.<\/p>\nThe goat was recognized as a form of wealth, subject to the law of firstlings (Nm 18:17). It had to be eight days old before it could be offered as a sacrifice. A year-old male goat was one of the animals offered at the Passover (28:22), and two goats were offered on the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:7-10). The goat was also used for other specific sacrifices.<\/p>\nThe ibex, a type of wild goat (Capra ibex nubiana),<\/em> still lives in small numbers on the cliffs close to the Dead Sea. That it was known in ancient times is evident from rock carvings. It is distinguished from the true wild goat by having a more compact rump and horns that are slender and curved back. Its slender legs and sharp cloven hooves enable it to cling to narrow rock ledges, to jump between them, and to climb steep cliffs.<\/p>\nUsually the ibex is found in rugged mountain country among rocky crags and meadows just below the snow line (Ps 104:18). In Job 39:1 they are referred to as “mountain goats.” They frequently gather in herds of 5 to 20. They graze and browse, being active in the afternoon and sometimes feeding through the night. The large horn of the ibex was at one period made into the shofar that was blown in the second Jerusalem temple to announce the new year and the jubilee year.<\/p>\nThe goat was often used in a figurative and symbolic sense by the writers of the Bible: in Song of Songs 4:1 and 6:5 for the bride’s black hair; in Matthew 25:31-46 for the wicked; and in Ezekiel 34:17 and Daniel 8:5-8 for various human leaders.<\/p>\nGrasshopper<\/p>\nLarge insects of the Orthoptera order. They have chewing or biting mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the front pair of which is narrow and somewhat thickened and the hind pair membranous and used for flying. When not in use the flight wings are folded beneath the protective front wings like a fan against the body. By rubbing their wings together, male grasshoppers produce sounds that both males and females can detect. Grasshoppers pass through a partial metamorphosis; the egg hatches into a juvenile nymph that looks like an adult except for its smaller size and undeveloped wings. After several months the nymph becomes a winged adult.<\/p>\nThe terms “grasshopper” and “locust” are often used interchangeably. Actually the locust is a kind of grasshopper. Also confusing is the fact that other insects such as cicadas are sometimes called locusts. The difference between grasshoppers and locusts depends more on behavior than appearance. Grasshoppers are individual insects that lead solitary lives and do not migrate. The same insects when migrating in a swarm are called migratory grasshoppers or locusts. Elimination of their food supply by drought, flood, or fire may lead to migration. Climatic factors such as a warm dry winter also stimulate migrations.<\/p>\nGrasshoppers and locusts have been a staple food in the Middle East and also among the Indians of the American Southwest. To the Israelites the grasshopper was considered ritually clean and could be eaten (Lv 11:22).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\nHare<\/p>\nAnimal of the genus and species Lepus europaeus judaeus, Lepus capensis,<\/em> and Lepus arabicus.<\/em> It is found in open country, often near or on cultivated lands, and in woods, usually deciduous rather than evergreen. It is an herbivorous rodent and is different from the rabbit, which is not found in Palestine. Although it is not a true ruminant according to modern classification (because it does not have a four-chambered stomach), the hare does rechew its food. It has a process of partial regurgitation of material too hard for the cells in the stomach to absorb initially; thus, the hare actually chews food previously swallowed.<\/p>\nNear Eastern hares have very long ears and large hind feet; their feet are well furred. They are similar to American jackrabbits, which are true hares. Hares do not dig or occupy burrows the way rabbits do. Hares are mainly nocturnal and spend their inactive hours hiding in vegetation. They eat grasses and herbaceous matter as well as twigs and young bark of woody plants. Hares breed with great rapidity—the young attaining sexual maturity at six months after birth.<\/p>\nThe hare was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:6; Dt 14:7), evidently because although it appeared to chew its cud, it did not have cloven hooves. Consumption of hares has also been forbidden among the Arabs, Chinese, and Lapps, but the hare was widely hunted by other people in ancient and modern times. Its great speed, prolific breeding, timidity, and caution have saved it from extermination by its many enemies.<\/p>\nHippopotamus<\/p>\nLarge beast of problematic interpretation. Some early interpreters thought it referred to the elephant, others to the wild ox, the mammoth, or any large animal. It was called “behemoth” by the kjv<\/span> translators. Today it is generally agreed that the reference is to the hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius),<\/em> a large, thick-skinned, amphibious mammal, an ungulate (having hooflike toenails) with a large head, a bulky, hairless body, and short legs.<\/p>\nThe description in Job 40:15-24 fits closely the modern hippopotamus (see nlt<\/span>), except for the depiction of the tail. At present the hippopotamus is found only in the rivers of Africa, but there is fossil evidence that it has existed in the Holy Land, perhaps in the swamps of northern Galilee and the Jordan Valley.<\/p>\nThe hippopotamus has highly developed sense organs, placed in such a way that it can see, hear, and smell almost without being seen; its eyes, ears, and nostrils can reach above water while the rest of the animal lies submerged. It has a large mouth, large tusks, and a short, heavy throat. The strong legs are so short that the belly almost reaches the ground when the animal is on the land. The hippopotamus lives on plants and herbs growing in rivers, but if food is scarce there, it forages on land, usually at night. In spite of its heavy body it is surprisingly agile on land.<\/p>\nHorse<\/p>\nPrzewalski’s horse (Equus przewalskii,<\/em> an eastern race that roamed about Mongolia until modern firearms destroyed most of them after World War I) and the tarpan (a western race of southern Russia that became extinct in the Ukraine in 1851). The domesticated horse (Equus caballus)<\/em> seems to have been derived from the tarpan. The original site of domestication is believed to have been Turkestan, a region north of Afghanistan and India, now in Russia. The horse differs from the donkey in that it has shorter ears, a longer mane with a forelock, a long hairy tail, and a soft, sensitive muzzle.<\/p>\nHorses were used in war not only for riding but also for pulling the heavy, springless war chariots. Two kinds of horses were needed for these different purposes, and the Hebrews distinguished between chariot horses and cavalry horses.<\/p>\n\nThe Lord warned the early Israelites against unnecessarily amassing military strength in the form of horses and thereby following the oppressive tactics of the powerful Egyptians (Dt 17:14-16), but the demands of war caused both David and Solomon to import horses from Egypt into their kingdoms and to breed them. Solomon greatly increased the number of horses in the Jewish kingdom and maintained large stables at various cities (1 Kgs 10:26) such as the regional defense centers of Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer (1 Kgs 9:15-19). Ahab’s horses are mentioned in 1 Kings 18:5, and records of Shalmaneser III state that Ahab furnished 2,000 chariots to a coalition against Assyria.<\/p>\nIn early Israel, the horse was opposed as a symbol of pagan luxury and of dependence on physical power for defense (Dt 17:16; 1 Sm 8:11; Ps 20:7; Is 31:1). Horse trading, mentioned as early as Genesis 47:17, was carried on by Solomon between Egypt and the Syro-Hittite principalities (1 Kgs 10:28-29). Most biblical references to horses refer to their use in war, but horses were also used for transportation. Riding seems to have been less popular than the use of chariots. Cavalry units were not introduced until the 12th century BC<\/span> by the Medes. Joseph rode in Pharaoh’s second horse-drawn chariot (Gn 41:43), and Absalom made a display by riding a horse-drawn chariot (2 Sm 15:1). Naaman traveled by horse and chariot (2 Kgs 5:9). Later, horses were so common in Jerusalem that the royal palace had a special horse gate (2 Chr 23:15), and a gate of the city itself was known as the Horse Gate (Neh 3:28; Jer 31:40). Mordecai rode a royal horse of King Xerxes as a sign of honor (Est 6:8-11). Horses are often spoken of figuratively (Ps 32:9; “mare,” Sg 1:9; “stallions,” Jer 5:8; 12:5), especially in the context of judgment (Hb 3:8; Zec 1:8; 6:1-8; Rv 6:2-8; 9:17; 19:11-16).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Warfare; Travel.<\/p>\nHyena<\/p>\nStocky carnivore (Hyaena hyaena)<\/em> with coarse hair, an erect mane, and long hairs along the neck and back. Hyenas live in holes among rocks and banks. They are mainly nocturnal but are ordinarily neither noisy nor aggressive. Their cry, however, is a disagreeable, unearthly sound. Hyenas usually feed on carrion, crushing bones with their powerful jaws. If the carrion supply is inadequate, they will kill sheep, goats, or other small animals. When threatened, hyenas growl and erect their mane, but they rarely fight. They are massively built with forelegs longer than the hind legs.<\/p>\nKnown as scavengers in Africa, hyenas eat domestic refuse in the villages. In Palestine the striped hyena is a common predator, preferring rocky territory and even rock tombs. Since hyenas were notorious for raiding the graves of the dead, all Israelites who could afford it arranged for burial in tombs protected by massive stone doors. Absalom, King David’s son who was killed by Joab in the wild, was buried under a huge pile of stones to protect his corpse from molestation by hyenas (2 Sm 18:17).<\/p>\nJackal<\/p>\nCarnivore (Canis aureus)<\/em> smaller than the true wolf and with a shorter tail. It is similar to the fox but has a broader head, shorter ears, and longer legs. The fox is solitary; the jackal tends to be gregarious. Its tail can be drooping or erect, compared with the long horizontal tail of the fox. Jackals usually prowl at night, either singly, in pairs, or in packs through open savannah country. They eat small mammals, poultry, fruit, vegetables, and carrion. They spend their days in thickets and clumps of vegetation. Often they obtain scraps from kills by larger carnivores. Jackals can run at speeds of about 33 miles (53 kilometers) per hour.<\/p>\nThe jackal can reach a height of about 20 inches (51 centimeters), roughly the size of a German shepherd dog. Its back is pale yellow with dark, almost black, flanks. Its lips are black and its ears white on the inside. The howl of the jackal sounds like the crying of a child or the heartrending wail of the bereaved (Mi 1:8; cf. Jb 30:29). To other jackals the howl is merely an invitation calling the pack together for its nocturnal hunting.<\/p>\nOT references are chiefly to jackals prowling around ruined cities and wilderness areas (Neh 2:13; Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; 34:13; 35:7; Jer 9:11; 14:6; 49:33; 51:37; Lam 4:3; 5:18; Mal 1:3). Many such references are translated “dragon” in the kjv<\/span>, but “jackal” is more appropriate.<\/p>\nLeech<\/p>\nSegmented worm (class Hirundinea) up to five inches (12.7 centimeters) long with a flat body equipped with suction pads at each end. The mouth, located at the bottom of the front suction pad, has three teeth that the leech uses to pierce the skin of its host. The leech feeds on blood, and its glands secrete an anticoagulant to prevent the blood from clotting. The ordinary medicinal leech (Hirudo medicinalis) is abundant in springs and ponds from the Negev Desert to Galilee. It adheres to the bodies of human beings and animals that submerge themselves in water, injects its anticoagulant, and sucks their blood.<\/p>\nThe reference in Proverbs 30:15 is uncertain (see nlt<\/span>) but may be to the parasitic and greedy nature of the horse leech (genus Haemopis<\/em>). The small horse leech enters its host’s mouth and nostrils from water while the animal is drinking. A leech weighing one-half ounce (14.2 grams) has been known to gorge itself with two and a half ounces (71 grams) of concentrated blood and then to exist for 15 months with no more to eat.<\/p>\nLeopard<\/p>\nCalled Panthera pardus tulliana,<\/em> it is the most widespread of all the large wildcats. In rocky areas it lives in caves, but in forested regions it lives in thick vegetation. In OT times many lived in the vicinity of Mt Hermon (Sg 4:8).<\/p>\nThe leopard is somewhat smaller than the tiger, measuring up to 5 feet (1.5 meters) in length with a tail of about 30 inches (.8 meter). Its body is better proportioned than that of the tiger. The leopard takes its victim by surprise from a silent ambush, often concealing itself near villages or watering places and waiting for its prey, remaining in one spot for long spans of time. The leopard is swift on the ground (Hb 1:8), agile in trees, and very graceful in its movements. Its color is yellowish speckled with black spots (Jer 13:23). Daniel and John saw visions in which leopards were symbols of world powers (Dn 7:6; Rv 13:2).<\/p>\nThe leopard is a wary and cunning animal, formidable and ferocious (Jer 5:6; Hos 13:7; cf. Is 11:6). The leopard is dangerous not only to domestic animals but also to humans. With its natural camouflage it can hide on the forest floor, blending into the changing light and shadows. The Israelites were terrified of the leopard because it constantly ravaged their sheep and goats. Several biblical place names suggest that they were known for the leopards in their vicinity: Nimrah, Beth-nimrah, and Nimrim, a district northeast of the Dead Sea. It has survived in the Holy Land into the present century; a few leopards still exist in remote areas near Mt Tabor and Mt Carmel.<\/p>\nLeviathan<\/p>\nSea monster mentioned several times in the Bible (Pss 74:14; 104:26; Is 27:1, nlt<\/span>). It may refer to any of the larger marine animals such as large jellyfish, whales, or sharks, or to a large reptile like the crocodile. Some scholars think “Leviathan” may refer to animals now extinct, such as ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs (marine reptiles similar to dinosaurs). The scriptural term might also refer to certain dinosaurs that spent part of their lives half-submerged in shallow lakes and oceans. Other scholars believe that most of the references are to the crocodile.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\nLion<\/p>\nLarge, tawny-colored carnivore (Panthera leo)<\/em> that preys chiefly on hoofed mammals and charges by a series of leaps and bounds. Within historic times the lion ranged in Africa, Europe, and the Holy Land. In ancient times the territories of the African and Persian lions met in the Middle East. The lion of the Holy Land was the Asiatic or Persian lion (Panthera leo persica).<\/em><\/p>\nThe males have heavy manes that stop at the shoulders but cover much of the chest. The Persian lion cannot climb and is mainly nocturnal, returning to its lair or a thicket by day (Jer 4:7; 25:38; Na 2:11-12). This lion is about 5 feet (1.5 meters) long with a tasseled tail 30 inches (.8 meter) or so long; its shoulders may reach a height of 35 inches (.9 meter). It is one of the smallest of the lion breeds.<\/p>\nLions are usually found in pairs, though sometimes in larger numbers. A small group is known as a pride. They generally prefer open country but in Palestine evidently prowled the subtropical vegetation of the Jordan River valley. Lions, which usually hunt at dusk, kill smaller animals by a blow of the paw, larger ones by a bite in the throat. A lion does not remain in the same place for more than a few days. The animal is in its prime at about seven years of age, when it weighs from 400 to 600 pounds (181.6 to 272.4 kilograms).<\/p>\nThe lion does not characteristically attack humans, though like other great cats it may become a man-eater (1 Kgs 13:24-28; 20:36; 2 Kgs 17:25-26; Ps 57:4; Dn 6:7-27). Ordinarily, it attacks only out of great hunger or in self-defense. A very young lion that attacks humans can become dangerous if it develops a taste for human flesh. A very old lion, expelled from the pride because it can no longer keep up in the pursuit of antelope or gazelles, may choose humans as a relatively slow-moving prey.<\/p>\nA lion generally roars only on a full stomach—that is, after it has consumed its prey (Ps 22:13; Ez 22:25; Am 3:4). Nevertheless, its roaring arouses fear (Am 3:8; 1 Pt 5:8). The lion is a bold (2 Sm 17:10; Prv 28:1), destructive animal (Ps 7:2; Jer 2:30; Hos 5:14; Mi 5:8), and the enemy of flocks (Am 3:12).<\/p>\nLions were common in biblical times in all parts of the Holy Land. Hebrew has at least seven words for lion and young lion. The lion is referred to about 130 times in the OT—more than any other wild animal. Lions were evidently much less common in NT times. After gradually declining, they became extinct in Palestine shortly after AD<\/span> 1300. The lion was present in Mesopotamia, however, until the end of the 19th century.<\/p>\nLions played an important part in the political and religious symbolism of the Near East (1 Kgs 10:19-20). In Assyria and Babylonia the lion was regarded as a royal beast (Dn 7:4). Oriental monarchs maintained artificial lion pits as places of execution (Ez 19:1-9; Dn 6:7-16). Animals for these were captured in camouflaged nets or pits. To the Jews, the lion was the mightiest of beasts (Prv 30:29-31). Thus, it symbolized leadership (Gn 49:9-10; Nm 24:9) and hence eventually became a title for Christ (Rv 5:5). It was also the ensign of Judah’s tribe and was used by King Solomon in the decoration of his house and the temple.<\/p>\nLizard<\/p>\nReptiles of the suborder Lacertilia. Their skin is covered with scales. The lizard is a useful creature because it captures harmful insects and worms. Like other reptiles, it lays eggs with shells softer than those of a bird and with no clear division between the yolk and the white. Lizards are “cold-blooded” organisms without a temperature-maintenance mechanism; hence, they become inactive in cold weather.<\/p>\nLizards can survive in barren parched countryside. In the Near East they are encountered in great numbers in the Arabian Desert, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Judean wilderness. There may be as many as 44 different species of lizards in the Holy Land.<\/p>\nThe Dabb lizard (genus Uromastyx<\/em>), which attains a length of about 24 inches (61 centimeters), is found in the Negev Desert. It is omnivorous, an unusual trait since most lizards are insectivorous. It has a hard, rough skin, green with brown spots; a short, rounded head; and a powerful tail encircled with a row of strong spines that it uses as a weapon of defense.<\/p>\nLizards are listed as ceremonially unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:29-31). The fact that lizards crawl on their bellies made them unclean. Contact with a lizard’s carcass defiled a law-abiding Jew (Lv 11:32-36). The nlt<\/span> translates the “lizards” of Leviticus 11 as “great lizard,” “gecko,” “monitor lizard,” “sand lizard,” and “chameleon.” The monitor lizard is a large lizard that lives in the deserts of southern Palestine, Sinai, and Egypt. It is up to 55 inches (1.4 meters) long with a long snout and sharp teeth. Other translators and commentators render the original Hebrew in a wide variety of ways, including “tortoise,” “ferret,” “lizard,” “snail,” “mole,” and even “water hen.” The fact that most of the original Hebrew words occur only once in Scripture makes it very difficult to be certain about their appropriate translation.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Gecko (above).<\/p>\nLocust<\/p>\nAn insect of the family Acridiidae.<\/em> It is referred to by at least 12 different names in Scripture. The various Hebrew words may refer to different stages of its development from larva to adult or to the type of damage that it causes. Locusts are characterized by swarming and mass migration. In modern times they have caused extensive and disastrous destruction to vegetation. Grasshoppers do not swarm or migrate en masse, differentiating them from the true locusts.<\/p>\nThe OT mentions several different species of locusts. Leviticus 11:22 seems to refer to the slant-faced (bald) locust and also to the katydid, or long-horned grasshopper. The reference in Deuteronomy 28:42 may be to the mole cricket. In Joel 1:4 and 2:25 and in Nahum 3:16-17, successive stages of the insect’s development are described. The cutting locust (kjv<\/span> “palmerworm”) of Joel is probably the first instar (stage of development), the swarming locusts (kjv<\/span> “locust”) are middle stages, and the hopping locusts (kjv<\/span> “cankerworm”) later instars but not yet fully matured insects. In the adult stage, called destroying locusts (kjv<\/span> “caterpillar”), the color of the locust is reddish brown, which turns to yellow with a brownish network on the wings.<\/p>\nOnly three of the hundreds of varieties of locusts found in Bible lands are capable of multiplying into great swarms, and only the desert locust (Schistocerca gergaria)<\/em> can be considered widespread in all the Bible lands. The desert locust is native to the Sudan (Africa). It is a little over two inches (5 centimeters) long and has a wingspread of some five inches (12.7 centimeters). It shows two phases, a solitary phase and a gregarious phase, with a possible third phase known as transiens. There are differences in the immature and adult forms of the phases in color and physiology.<\/p>\nThe quantity and distribution of rains are important factors in the extent of swarming. Moist soil is needed for depositing the eggs and permitting them to develop. Each female deposits from one to six egg pods, containing 28 to 146 eggs each. The larvae emerge in 15 to 43 days.<\/p>\nIn the gregarious phase (from the second stage of metamorphosis onward), the locust is driven by a strong wandering instinct. Masses of them form a random procession of overflowing locust bodies that ignore any obstruction. They swarm over everything (Jl 2:4-9). The only regulator of their activities is temperature; they are immobilized by high or low temperatures. Taking to wing they may move 1,200 miles (1,930.8 kilometers) from their native home. They fly in compact formations large enough to blot out the light of the sun. Their movement seems to be controlled by hormones, but the direction is influenced by the wind. The swarms consume almost every plant in their path, sparing only the carob, sycamore, castor tree, and oleander bush.<\/p>\nA locust plague was one of the most severe evils to come upon the ancient world (Dt 28:38). Joel 2:1-11 describes a locust plague in graphic terms, using it as a symbol of God’s destroying judgment. Special days of prayer, fasting, and trumpet blowing were prescribed to remove locust plagues (1 Kgs 8:37-38; 2 Chr 6:28-29; Jl 2:12-17). Locusts symbolized powerful and merciless enemies that completely destroyed the earnings of human toil (Jgs 6:5; Is 33:4; Jer 46:23; 51:27; Na 3:15).<\/p>\nBedouins eat locusts raw, roasted, or boiled, preserving them by drying and threading. They are also crushed and ground, and the grist used in cooking or eaten with bread, sometimes mixed with honey and dates. Such was the diet of John the Baptist (Mk 1:6). The Greeks ground locusts in stone mortars to make flour of them.<\/p>\nThe ancients considered the two large hind legs, or jumping legs, as separate limbs and had a special name for them. Hence locusts were described as having four legs, a reference to the four smaller walking legs. “Going on all fours” thus referred to creeping or walking as opposed to jumping and did not mean that the unclean insects had only four legs in all. Because of its two hind jumping legs, the locust was exempted from the prohibition against unclean insects (Lv 11:20-23).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\nMole<\/p>\nRodent (Spalax ehrenbergi)<\/em> from six to nine inches (15 to 23 centimeters) long, which burrows in any area where the soil is suitable for digging; it should be called a mole rat. Common in the Holy Land, large numbers are found in the vicinity of Jerusalem. Isaiah 2:20 refers to the mole, as does Leviticus 11:29-30 (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe mole rat has no tail and is molelike in appearance, but neither true moles nor shrews have ever been found in the Holy Land. The mole rat’s teeth are strong and protruding like those of a squirrel. The neck is short and thick with a plump body shaped like a sausage. The short legs have broad paws with claws adapted for burrowing. The fur is soft, thick, and ashen gray. Its ears and almost sightless eyes, which are no larger than poppyseeds, are hidden in the fur. Folklore taught that touching a mole rat would result in blindness.<\/p>\nIn the wet winter season the mole rat builds breeding mounds resembling those of pocket gophers. It builds less complex resting mounds in the summer, although both have rather elaborate tunnel systems. The mole rat feeds on roots, bulbs, tubers, and various other subterranean plant parts, often doing extensive damage to agriculture.<\/p>\nMoth<\/p>\nInsect of the genus Tineola<\/em> that lays its eggs on wool or furs, its larvae feeding on those materials. The destructive qualities of moths are referred to in several biblical passages (Jb 13:28; Ps 39:11; Is 50:9; Hos 5:12; Mt 6:19-20; Lk 12:33; Jas 5:2). In Isaiah 51:8 “worm” (nlt<\/span>) refers specifically to the larva of the clothes moth. The moth symbolizes disintegration, decay, and weakening. It is only the larvae that do the damage. The adult is quite harmless and feeds mainly on the nectar of flowers. It is easily crushed (Jb 4:19). The clothes moth reproduces in May or June. It enters human dwellings in the evening. A week after the eggs are laid the larvae appear and immediately begin their work of destruction, eating anything within reach made of animal fibers.<\/p>\nThe moth’s destructive activity is done in secret without any sound and without any dramatic appearance, such as a swarm that blots out the sun. In an age when wealth was counted more in possessions than in money, and when among those possessions wool clothing was highly valued, moths could literally cause economic disaster; hence the words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 6:19-20).<\/p>\nThere are hundreds of species of moths other than the clothes moth in the Holy Land; they are harmless to leaves, flowers, fruit, trees, and seeds. As with the clothes moth, the larvae inflict the damage.<\/p>\nMouse<\/p>\nRodent of the family Muridae, especially genus Mus.<\/em> The mouse was regarded as unclean because, being short legged, it was considered one of the creeping creatures (Lv 11:29). Mice known as commensals live in dwellings and tend to have longer tails and to be darker in color than wild mice, which are active chiefly at night. Mice are good climbers and even good swimmers. Wild mice eat many kinds of vegetation, including seeds, fleshy roots, leaves, and stems. At times they store food.<\/p>\nThe Hebrew word for “mouse” (Lv 11:29; 1 Sm 6:4-5; Is 66:17) is probably a general term for various rats and mice. The root meaning of the Hebrew word “mouse” is “destruction of corn,” a reference to the damage mice do to field crops. At least 23 varieties of mouselike rodents are known in the Holy Land. They cause food spoilage, damage household articles, and transport the host fleas that spread typhus, spotted fever, and bubonic plague. Plague bacteria may have caused the tumors or swellings among the Philistines (1 Sm 6:5). Isaiah 66:17 refers to a pre-exilic Canaanite cultic practice in which mice were eaten; the reference may actually be to the hamster. A number of rodents are eaten by Arabs of the Near East; the gerbil is considered a special delicacy. See<\/em> Mole (above).<\/p>\nMule<\/p>\nHybrid offspring of a male ass and a female horse (Equus asinus mulus),<\/em> ordinarily sterile. The offspring of a female donkey and a stallion (male horse) is known as a hinny and is of little value because of its inferior size.<\/p>\nBecause crossbreeding was forbidden in the law (Lv 19:19), the Israelites procured mules from the Gentiles, perhaps from the Phoenicians, since Tyre (a Phoenician seaport in what is now southern Lebanon) imported horses and mules (Ez 27:14). Mules did not appear in Israel until David’s reign (2 Sm 13:29), possibly because of the rarity of horses among the Hebrews. Mules were used chiefly by members of the royal court and by other nobles. King David rode on a mule, and Solomon rode to his inaugaration on King David’s mule (1 Kgs 1:33). Absalom met his death riding on a mule (2 Sm 18:9). Mules were less common than horses, camels, and asses in the postexilic community (Ezr 2:66). In antiquity Asia Minor was especially noted for breeding fine mules.<\/p>\nMules have long enjoyed a reputation for obstinacy, but that trait is not mentioned in the Bible. The mule is prized for riding and for carrying heavy burdens, especially in warm mountainous regions. They are sure-footed and thrive best in hot, dry climates. The mule has the frugality, endurance, and steady gait of an ass along with the size, strength, swiftness, and courage of a horse. Mules are almost never sick. They live longer than horses. They can carry a load of up to 300 pounds (136 kilograms) as far as 30 miles (48.3 kilometers) a day.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\nPig<\/p>\nMost properly, newborn swine. “Swine” is technically the better name for the species, but it is rarely used in common speech today. The domestic pigs of the Middle East derived from the wild pig (Sus scrofa).<\/em> The pig is the most prolific and abundant supplier of meat and fat for food. A thick layer of fat just under the skin is especially pronounced in domestic breeds. Pigs cannot be driven, so they are of value only to the settled farmer. The Hebrews were originally a nomadic people; therefore, they had little use for an animal closely associated with settled life. An Egyptian prince of about 1500 BC<\/span>, however, is recorded as owning a herd of 1,500 swine.<\/p>\nThe pig is clumsily built, yet lively and able to move with agility and speed. The most conspicuous characteristic of the pig is a truncated, mobile snout terminating in a disc-shaped surface on which the nostrils are located. Most pigs have large tusks in both jaws which grow continuously in life. The tusks of the upper jaw are unique in that they curve upward instead of pointing downward as in most animals. The excrement of a pig has an almost unbearable odor, which clings not only to the pig itself but also to swineherds, who can be identified a long way off.<\/p>\nPigs were never raised in the Holy Land by Jews. The great herd into which Jesus drove the unclean spirits was encountered in the land of the Gadarenes, a non-Jewish area east of the Jordan. The Gadarene demons took refuge in a herd of pigs feeding on a bluff overlooking the Sea of Galilee (Mt 8:28-32).<\/p>\nWild pigs were found in the Holy Land as in many countries today. Psalm 80:13 refers to the destructiveness of a wild boar (the male, or hog) attacking growing crops. A party of wild boars can destroy an entire vineyard or a field of crops in a single night. They devour, trample, and ravage everything within reach.<\/p>\nBoar hunts were common in ancient Mesopotamia. Wild boars do not attack unless molested, but they are dangerous when aroused. They travel in bands of from 6 to 50 and are most active in the evening and early morning hours. The body is covered with stiff bristles and usually some finer hair, but the body covering is often quite scanty. Wild pigs are mainly vegetarian, feeding on roots, nuts, grains, and plant stems. Wild boars were particularly abundant in the mountainous regions of Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon, in the Jordan River valley, and in wooded sections such as Mt Tabor.<\/p>\nStrict Jews would not even mention swine by name but would always substitute the term “the abomination.” Israelites considered themselves polluted if they were even touched by a swine’s bristle. To the Jews, the pig symbolized filth and ugliness. Pigs will eat fecal material, vermin, rodents, carrion, and the like (2 Pt 2:22). Proverbs 11:22 refers to the incongruity of a golden ring in the nose of an animal showing such characteristics. A similar metaphor occurs in Jesus’ statement about casting pearls before swine (Mt 7:6). The prodigal son’s degeneration was shown by his being forced in his poverty to feed pigs and eat their food (Lk 15:15-16).<\/p>\nEating the flesh of pigs was forbidden to the Jews (Lv 11:7; Dt 14:8). The Canaanites in the Holy Land killed and ate pigs freely. In intertestamental times Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), a Syrian king whose territories included Israel, used the pig to “Hellenize” the Jews. He first tested their loyalty to the Jewish faith by requiring the consumption of pork, considered a delicacy by the Greeks (2 Macc 6:18). The act of desecration that drove the Jews to rebellion, however, was the sprinkling of pig blood on the temple altar in a sacrifice to Zeus (1 Macc 1:47).<\/p>\nPigs were frequently used in pagan worship (Is 65:4; 66:3, 17), which may account for their being forbidden to the Jews as food. Evidence in the Holy Land shows that pigs were sacrificed long before Hellenistic times. Pig bones were found in a grotto below the rock-cut place of sacrifice at Gezer. A similar underground chamber with vessels containing piglet bones at Tirzah dates to the middle Bronze Age (about 2000 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nAlabaster fragments of a statuette of a pig ready to be sacrificed have been unearthed. Swine were sacrificed to Aphrodite (Venus) in Greece and Asia Minor. In addition, pigs were sacrificed in connection with oaths and treaties; in the Iliad,<\/em> Agamemnon sacrificed a boar to Zeus and Helios. So it is not surprising that among the Jews the pig became a symbol of filthiness and paganism.<\/p>\nIt is possible that eating pork was forbidden primarily because the pig may carry many worm parasites such as trichina, though that is also true of some “clean” animals. Another reason for forbidding their consumption may have been that pigs eat carrion. Some people are allergic to pork in hot weather—another suggested reason behind the Jewish taboo. The same taboo exists among the Muslims and existed in certain social strata in Egypt.<\/p>\nPorcupine<\/p>\nRodent, Hystrix cristata,<\/em> which lives in forested areas, rocky hills, ravines, and valleys. The porcupine is still found in the Holy Land today. It has long quills that can be raised to give the appearance of a crest. It is almost entirely nocturnal. It burrows by day into a natural cavity or crevice. The Old World porcupine rarely climbed trees, although the New World porcupine frequently does. A porcupine may weigh as much as 60 pounds (27.2 kilograms). It eats fruit, bark, roots, and other vegetation, and carrion as well. Although its flesh is edible, the porcupine was not classed among the clean animals for the Israelites. The reference in Isaiah 34:11 (rsv<\/span>) is probably to the porcupine, as is Isaiah 14:23 in the nlt<\/span>. See<\/em> Hedgehog.<\/p>\nScorpion<\/p>\nArthropod of the same group as spiders (arachnids). A dozen species of scorpions (order Scorpionida) are found in the Holy Land, but 90 percent of the scorpions are yellow scorpions, usually three to five inches (7.6 to 12.7 centimeters) long. The rock scorpion, also common to the Holy Land, is as thick as a man’s finger and from five to seven inches (12.7 to 17.8 centimeters) in length. Scorpions are slow, nocturnal invertebrates that rest beneath stones by day and prey on insects and other arachnids by night. At the end of its long tail the scorpion carries a poisonous sting that is fatal to most prey and extremely painful to humans (Rv 9:3, 5, 10; cf. 1 Kgs 12:11, 14). Scorpions symbolize Ezekiel’s evil countrymen (Ez 2:6) and the demonic forces of Satan (Lk 10:19). The scorpion is referred to as frequenting the Sinai Desert (Dt 8:15).<\/p>\nA scorpion has from six to eight eyes. It has eight legs like a spider and two lobsterlike claws with which it catches and holds its prey. It feeds particularly on locusts and beetles. In many species the female scorpion eats the male after mating. Scorpions lay eggs that hatch very shortly after laying. Scorpions prefer warmer climates, and because of their desire for warmth, enter houses, especially at night, hiding in beds, blankets, footwear, and clothing.<\/p>\nSheep<\/p>\nDomestic animal, Ovis orientalis,<\/em> referred to directly or by some term such as ewe, lamb, ram, or by some fact concerning them over 700 times in Scripture.<\/p>\nSheep represented the chief wealth and total livelihood of pastoral peoples, providing food to eat, milk to drink, wool for the making of cloth, and hides and bones for other uses. In addition, the sheep was a medium of exchange and a sacrificial animal. The number of sheep raised in ancient times was prodigious. Mesha, king of Moab, paid a tribute annually of 100,000 lambs and the wool of 100,000 rams (2 Kgs 3:4). The Israelites took 250,000 sheep from the Hagrites (1 Chr 5:21).<\/p>\nSheep shearing was often done for festivals (2 Sm 13:23). The sheep was held down on its side and its legs were tied together; then it lay docilely while its wool was clipped (Is 53:7). Sheep reserved for burnt offerings were not shorn; nothing could be held back from a sacrifice to the Lord.<\/p>\nWool had to be processed before it could be used for clothing. First it was washed, sometimes while still on the sheep, then carded and perhaps weighed for the market. The spinning of wool was regarded as a woman’s work (Prv 31:19), but weaving the spun thread into cloth on a loom was primarily a man’s occupation.<\/p>\nThe Bible reports that Abel kept sheep (Gn 4:2). The first sheep to be domesticated was probably the argali (Ovis ammon),<\/em> a variety of the urial (Ovis vignei),<\/em> a mountainous species still existing in Turkestan and Mongolia. Five breeds had reached Mesopotamia by 2000 BC<\/span>; all were of the urial stock.<\/p>\nThe sheep known in Israel was the broad-tailed sheep (Ovis orientalis vignei<\/em> or laticaudata),<\/em> of which the tail weighs from 10 to 15 pounds (4.5 to 6.8 kilograms) and has always been considered a delicacy. Thus the Lord asked for this choice part as a sacrifice (Ex 29:22-25).<\/p>\nOnly the ram of the broad-tailed sheep has horns, but in other varieties of sheep in the Holy Land the ewe also has horns. The horns, two to three inches (5 to 8 centimeters) in diameter, can be potent weapons. Rams’ horns could be used as trumpets (Jos 6:4) or as oil containers (1 Sm 16:1).<\/p>\nAlthough the sheep is very similar to the goat, it is differentiated by a lower forehead, its angulated spiral horns marked with transverse wrinkles and curved slightly outward, its covering of wool, and its lack of a “goatee.” Most sheep are white (Ps 147:16; Is 1:18; Dn 7:9; Rv 1:14).<\/p>\nThe flesh of sheep was a luxury in the biblical culture. King Solomon required a daily provision of 100 sheep for his table (1 Kgs 4:23), but the common people ate lamb or mutton only on festive occasions. A young ram was usually chosen because the ewes were more important to the future prospects of the herd. The meat was boiled in large caldrons. The milk of the sheep is extremely rich; in biblical times it was usually allowed to curdle before drinking. Possibly some Israelites kept lambs in their houses as pets (2 Sm 12:3-4).<\/p>\nTo protect the flock at night against predatory attacks, the shepherd tried to provide a fold. In meadows near villages, folds were built and watchmen were hired to relieve the shepherds. The shepherds of the nativity story were out in the field (Lk 2:8); they had no fold but probably had set up a tent for shelter, consisting simply of goat-hair blankets spread across sapling supports. The scarcity of springs in the Holy Land made the watering of the flock a crucial problem for the shepherd (Gn 13:8-11).<\/p>\nWild mountain sheep, varieties of Ovis orientalis,<\/em> are known in the Mediterranean area (Dt 14:5). The Deuteronomy passage (kjv<\/span> “chamois”) might also refer to Ovis traelaphus,<\/em> a sheep about five feet high (1.5 meters) with long, curved horns. Another possibility is the Barbary sheep that lives in small flocks in rugged mountain areas in Barbary, Egypt, and Mt Sinai. The true chamois is unknown in Palestine.<\/p>\nThe sheep is also used figuratively in Scripture. The ram represented great strength and fittingly symbolized Medo-Persia in Daniel’s vision (Dn 8:3). It is the nature of sheep to be gentle and submissive (Is 53:7; Jer 11:19), defenseless (Mi 5:8; Mt 10:16), and in constant need of guidance and care (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36). Such qualities are regarded as desirable in the lives of believers in Christ; hence the many figurative references to sheep in the NT and to Jesus as shepherd (Mk 6:34; Jn 10:1-30; Rom 8:35-37; Heb 13:20-21; 1 Pt 2:25). The resurrected Christ told the apostle Peter to “feed my lambs” and “tend my sheep” (Jn 21:15-17).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\nSnail<\/p>\nInvertebrate gastropods (mollusks). Land snails are very numerous in the Near East. Some freshwater forms serve as hosts for the schistosome worm, the fluke parasite causing the dread disease bilharzia (schistosomiasis).<\/p>\nPurple dyes of all shades were highly valued in the ancient world. A royal purple dye was obtained from secretions of a sea snail (Murex trunculus<\/em> and Murex brandaris).<\/em> Evidently, that process was developed by Phoenicians, Egyptians, and Assyrians as early as 1500 BC<\/span>. The “purple” fishermen had their own guild during the time of the Roman Empire. The snails were harvested during the fall and winter seasons; in the spring, when egg laying took place, little dye was available. The snails tended to remain concealed in the summer. They inhabited the waters off Crete and Phoenicia. Tyrian purple, produced in the Phoenician city of Tyre, the center of the purple-dye industry, was obtained by a double dyeing. Large deposits of murex shells from dyeing operations have been found along the Mediterranean shoreline. The Israelites had to import purple goods (Ez 27:16). Lydia was a “seller of purple” or of cloth so dyed (Acts 16:14). Purple was a sign of distinction, royalty, and wealth (cf. Ex 25:4; 28:5-6, 15; Nm 15:38; 2 Chr 2:7; Est 8:15; Prv 31:22; Sg 3:10; Ez 27:7; Dn 5:7).<\/p>\nExodus 30:34-35 refers to “onycha,” which was an important ingredient of incense. Onycha is the horny, clawlike operculum (the plate that closes off the opening of its shell when a snail is retracted) of a Near Eastern member of the molluskan family Strombidae. The operculum is sometimes used for offense or locomotion as well as for defense. When burned, the operculum gives off a sharp, strong scent, and when mixed with more fragrant but less powerful substances is even more potent. The name “onycha” is derived from a Greek word (onyx)<\/em> for a fingernail or a claw.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>\nSnake<\/p>\nVarious species of snake, suborder Ophidia (Serpentes). In the Bible nine Hebrew words and four Greek ones refer to snakes. The most common Hebrew word is onomatopoeic—that is, it is an imitation of a snake hissing or of the sound it produces as it scrapes its scales along the ground (cf. Jer 46:22). Many types of snakes lay eggs (Is 59:5), although some retain the eggs in the body until ready to hatch.<\/p>\nSnakes are among the most widespread reptiles and are found on all continents except Antarctica; they decrease in numbers and species toward the poles but increase as one approaches the equator. Thirty-three species of snakes are known in Palestine and neighboring countries, 20 of which are poisonous. Two dangerous characteristics of the snake noted by biblical writers are its inconspicuous way of moving and the ease with which it hides itself.<\/p>\nMany snakes are able to swallow animals several times their own diameter because of their unusually flexible jaw mechanism. They lack not only legs but also movable eyelids. Snakes periodically shed their skins. The tongue is actually a hearing apparatus sensitive to airborne vibrations and probably to heat waves.<\/p>\nThe venom of poisonous species is a clear, thin secretion, transmitted to the victim’s bloodstream by means of fangs. Two types of venom are known: that of the vipers, which affects respiration and disintegrates red blood cells, and that of the cobras, which paralyzes the nervous system.<\/p>\nThe “asp” referred to in the Bible is probably the cobra; the “adder” is the viper. The “cockatrice” (kjv<\/span>) is probably the adder. Serpents were associated with worship in Canaanite religion and symbolized evil deities among many other peoples. Steles (upright stones bearing inscriptions) have been unearthed at several sites in the Holy Land and Syria depicting a god or worshiper with a snake winding about the legs or body. Because the Israelites were burning incense in pagan worship of Moses’ bronze serpent (Nm 21:8-9), King Hezekiah destroyed it in his religious reform (2 Kgs 18:4).<\/p>\nAlthough snakes have been an object of veneration in some religions, in the Judeo-Christian tradition snakes represent evil and, more specifically, the devil. That association began in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:1-15) and is also found in the book of Revelation (12:9; 20:2-3).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Adder (above); Asp (above).<\/p>\nSpider<\/p>\nAnimal of the order Araneida. Between 600 and 700 different species inhabit the Holy Land. Spiders are different from insects in that, like scorpions, they have four pairs of legs instead of three. Spiders are equipped with poison glands—the effectiveness varying from species to species. A few can kill only insects, but others can also kill birds and mice.<\/p>\nMost spiders have a pair of spinnerets attached to silk glands on the underside of the abdomen; from them a web is extruded. In the Bible the spider’s web is referred to as a symbol of frailty and insecurity (Jb 8:14; Is 59:5-6).<\/p>\nSponge<\/p>\nSimple marine animals, phylum Porifera. The term “sponge” also refers to those animals’ skeletal remains. The sponge has a porous body composed of tubules and cells.<\/p>\nSponge fishing was well known in the Mediterranean area in ancient times. It was practiced particularly along the Anatolian and Syrian coasts. Sponges were harvested by divers. The use of sponges in absorbing liquids is referred to in the Bible (Mt 27:48; Mk 15:36).<\/p>\nUnicorn<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Wild Ox (below).<\/p>\nWasp<\/p>\nInsects of the family Vespidae. Hornets are social wasps that build large aerial apartment houses in which 1,000 or more individuals may live. In the Bible the hornet is used as a metaphor for God’s use of military forces (Ex 23:28; Dt 7:20; Jos 24:12).<\/p>\nWhale<\/p>\nLargest of all living creatures, including those that have become extinct. Whales are air-breathing mammals of the order Cetacea.<\/p>\nTwo varieties of whales visit the shores of the Holy Land at times. The finback whale (Balaenoptera physalus)<\/em> weighs about 200 tons (181 metric tons) and lives mainly in the Arctic region but sometimes passes through the Straits of Gibraltar to reach the eastern Mediterranean Sea. It feeds on small marine organisms that it strains through its whale bone; it does not have teeth. The finback whale’s esophagus is narrow.<\/p>\nThe sperm whale (Physeter catodon),<\/em> about 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, has a curiously shaped head that looks like a battering ram. The teeth in the lower jaw of the male sperm whale are about seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long. It feeds on big fish, even on sharks. It has a large throat opening.<\/p>\nWhales are referred to in Genesis 1:21 and Job 7:12 (kjv<\/span> only). The “great fish” of Jonah 2:1 need not have been a whale but could have been a large shark, such as the whale shark (Rhineodon),<\/em> which grows 70 feet (21.3 meters) long and lacks the terrible teeth of other sharks. Whatever the actual marine organism, Jonah’s deliverance was miraculous. The Greek word for “whale” is sometimes used as a general term for “sea monster” or huge fish and may be used in that sense in Matthew 12:40.<\/p>\nWild Ox<\/p>\nLarge, fierce, fleet, intractable animal (Bos primigenius).<\/em> It had a long, lean rump with a straight back and a long, narrow head. The animal described in Job 39:9-12 is clearly the wild ox. The two horns (Dt 33:17), its outstanding characteristic, were straight and as long as the head (Nm 23:22; 24:8; Ps 22:21). Kings often symbolized their dominion by wearing a helmet with two wild ox horns (cf. Pss 92:10; 132:17-18). The horns were often used as drinking vessels by the Israelites; some were large enough to hold four gallons (15 liters).<\/p>\nHunting the wild ox was a favorite sport of Assyrian kings. Tiglath-pileser I hunted it in the Lebanon Mountains about 1100 BC<\/span> (cf. Ps 29:6). At one time the animal referred to in Job 39:9-12 was thought to be the oryx or antelope because of the similarity between the Hebrew word in Job and the Arabian name for oryx. The translators of the kjv<\/span> called the wild ox a “unicorn” because of representations found on Babylonian mosaics and Egyptian drawings. Those representations showed it in strict profile, showing only one horn—hence, “unicorn.” Jerome’s Vulgate, a Latin Bible translation (fourth century AD<\/span>) and Martin Luther’s German version translated it similarly.<\/p>\nWolf<\/p>\nLarge doglike mammal (Canis lupus)<\/em> that travels in bands of up to 30 animals. From the nose to the rump, the wolf measures about 3 feet (.9 meter); its drooping tail is about 18 inches (.5 meter) long. It looks much like a skinny German shepherd dog. The grayish yellow pelt is coarse and short haired.<\/p>\nWolves hunt singly or in relays, usually at night (Jer 5:6). Wolves have acute hearing and sight but rely chiefly on scent and usually catch their prey in a swift, open chase. The wolf has a reputation for boldness, fierceness, and voracity (Gn 49:27; Hb 1:8). It commonly kills more than it can eat or drag away and thus is known for its greediness.<\/p>\nThe wolf is a restless animal, always on the move; hunger drives it from one place to another in constant search of new hunting grounds. During spring and fall, wolves usually roam singly or in pairs, whereas in summer they may travel in family groups. In winter, several such groups may join to form a large pack. Wolves are intelligent, social creatures, faithful to their own kind. They mate for life. Individually, the wolf is a rather timid animal; it would much rather avoid human beings. But collectively wolves can be among the most dangerous animals alive.<\/p>\nIn Egypt, Rome, and Greece the wolf was considered sacred. Wolves were well known in the Holy Land and are still found there and also in many places in Asia Minor. Shepherds continually battled with wolves that plundered their flocks (Jn 10:12).<\/p>\nThe Bible refers to wolves in a literal sense in only three places (Is 11:6; 65:25; Jn 10:12), all other references being figurative. Usually the wolf is a symbol of enemies or the wicked (e.g., Ez 22:27; Zep 3:3; Acts 20:29). Both the wolf’s courage and its cruelty were probably in the mind of the patriarch Jacob when he predicted the fate of Benjamin’s tribe (Gn 49:27).<\/p>\nWorm<\/p>\nActually insect larvae in most biblical references, usually maggots, the larvae of flies (see Fly, above). For example, maggots are evidently referred to in accounts of worms feeding on spoiled manna (Ex 16:19-20), corpses (Jb 21:26; Is 14:11), or open wounds (Jb 7:5). Mark 9:48 refers to a maggot that eats dead flesh. In Acts 12:23 a fatal, worm-induced abdominal disease of King Herod is mentioned. In other cases, the reference is to the larvae of other insects (Is 51:8). In Deuteronomy 28:39 and Jonah 4:7 the vine weevil (Cochylis ambiguella)<\/em> is probably referred to; it destroys vines by boring into their stems. Comparing a man to a worm is a metaphor for abasement (Jb 25:6; Ps 22:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANIMALS<\/h3>\nIn biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals as object lessons.<\/p>\nThe biblical approach to classification of animals is somewhat different from the system of classification used by biologists today. The present system of classification, which traces back to Carolus Linnaeus (an 18th-century Swedish botanist), is based on structure, both internal and external. The biblical basis of classification is habitat. Thus Genesis 1 speaks of aquatic organisms (v 20); aerial organisms (v 21); animals that crawl on the ground (v 24); cattle or domesticated animals (animals that live in association with humans) (v 24); and wild animals (v 24). The same system of classification is followed in Leviticus 11 and throughout Scripture.<\/p>\nBecause of the divergence between systems of classification, the various animals of the Bible will be listed here in alphabetical order—including reptiles, fish, and even invertebrates such as insects, spiders, worms, and sponges. Birds are discussed in a separate article.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Adder<\/p>\n• Ant<\/p>\n• Antelope<\/p>\n• Ape<\/p>\n• Asp<\/p>\n• Ass<\/p>\n• Badger<\/p>\n• Bat<\/p>\n• Bear<\/p>\n• Bee<\/p>\n• Behemoth<\/p>\n• Camel<\/p>\n• Caterpillar<\/p>\n• Cattle<\/p>\n• Chameleon<\/p>\n• Coral<\/p>\n• Cricket<\/p>\n• Crocodile<\/p>\n• Deer<\/p>\n• Dog<\/p>\n• Donkey<\/p>\n• Dragon<\/p>\n• Fish<\/p>\n• Flea<\/p>\n• Fly<\/p>\n• Fox<\/p>\n• Frog<\/p>\n• Gazelle<\/p>\n• Gecko<\/p>\n• Gnat<\/p>\n• Goat<\/p>\n• Grasshopper<\/p>\n• Hare<\/p>\n• Hippopotamus<\/p>\n• Horse<\/p>\n• Hyena<\/p>\n• Jackal<\/p>\n• Leech<\/p>\n• Leopard<\/p>\n• Leviathan<\/p>\n• Lion<\/p>\n• Lizard<\/p>\n• Locust<\/p>\n• Mole<\/p>\n• Moth<\/p>\n• Mouse<\/p>\n• Mule<\/p>\n• Pig<\/p>\n• Porcupine<\/p>\n• Scorpion<\/p>\n• Sheep<\/p>\n• Snail<\/p>\n• Snake<\/p>\n• Spider<\/p>\n• Sponge<\/p>\n• Unicorn<\/p>\n• Wasp<\/p>\n• Whale<\/p>\n• Wild Ox<\/p>\n• Wolf<\/p>\n• Worm<\/p>\n\nAdder<\/p>\nOne of the 20 poisonous snakes found in Israel and surrounding countries, also referred to as cockatrice and viper. True vipers (genus Cerastes, Echis colorata,<\/em> and Vipera palestina<\/em>) also exist there, poisonous snakes with curved fangs that spring into position when the snake strikes. The horned viper (Cerastes hasselquistii)<\/em> may attack horses. It is 12 to 18 inches (30 to 46 centimeters) long and often lies in ambush in the sand with only its eyes and the hornlike protrusions on its head visible.<\/p>\nBoth Jesus and John the Baptist referred to the viper several times (Mt 3:7; 12:34; 23:33). The reference in Acts 28:3 is probably to a small viper (Vipera aspis)<\/em> that strikes rapidly and is very pugnacious. It is found in southern Europe and hisses each time it inhales and exhales. The poison of vipers attacks the respiratory system and disintegrates red blood cells.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\nAnt<\/p>\nMentioned only twice in the Bible, both times in the book of Proverbs. For many years Solomon was charged with a biological error when he referred to the ant as providing her meat in the summer and gathering her food in the harvest (Prv 6:8). Critics of the Bible were quick to point out that, so far as was then known, ants do not store up food. They assumed that Solomon had probably kicked open an ant hill and mistaken the pupal cases (pods in which immature ants grow to maturity) for grain or had observed ants carrying bits of grain, leaves, and other matter to their nests.<\/p>\nAt least three species of grain-storing ants are now known—two occur in Israel and the other in Mediterranean countries. The particular species referred to by Solomon (Prv 6:6-8; 30:24-25) is probably the harvester ant (Messor semirufus).<\/em> Its granaries are flat chambers connected by galleries irregularly scattered over an area about six feet (1.8 meters) in diameter and about a foot (.3 meter) deep in the ground. Seeds are collected from the ground or picked from plants. The head, or radicle, which is the softest part of the kernel, is bitten off to prevent germination, and the chaff and empty capsules are discarded on kitchen middens (refuse piles) outside the nest. Individual granaries may be 5 inches (12.7 centimeters) in diameter and a half inch (1.2 centimeters) high. Some nests are known to be 40 feet (12 meters) in diameter and 6 to 7 feet (approx. 2 meters) deep with several entrances.<\/p>\nAntelope<\/p>\nSeveral antelope-like creatures are referred to in the Scriptures. One seems to be the white oryx (Oryx leucoryx),<\/em> referred to in Deuteronomy 14:5 (kjv<\/span> “wild ox”; rsv<\/span> “antelope”) and Isaiah 51:20 (kjv<\/span> “wild bull”; RSV <\/span>“antelope”). The oryx was probably the antelope, commonly used for food because its long horns made it relatively easy to catch.<\/p>\nAnother antelope mentioned in the Bible is the addax (Addax nasomaculatus),<\/em> probably the “pygarg” of Deuteronomy 14:5 (kjv<\/span>). It is a native of North Africa with grayish white hinder parts, a white patch on the forehead, and twisted and ringed horns. The word “pygarg” comes from a Greek word meaning “white rump.” The addax is about the size of a donkey. Its body is closely covered with short hair. It has a short mane on the underside of its neck that makes the head look somewhat like that of a goat. The hooves are broad and flat, and the tail resembles that of a donkey. It is common in Africa and in Arabia, where Arabs hunt it with falcons and dogs.<\/p>\nAntelopes are very graceful and run with their heads held high. Both sexes have long, permanent, hollow horns. With the oryx the horns go straight back; addax horns are twisted and ringed. Antelope are alert, wary, and keen sighted. They are usually found in herds of from two to a dozen. If injured or brought to bay, an antelope attacks with its head lowered so that the sharp horns point forward. Antelopes feed on grasses and shrubs, drinking from streams and water holes. When water is scarce, they eat melons and succulent bulbs. Both addax and oryx were ceremonially clean in Jewish law.<\/p>\nApe<\/p>\nPrimate not native to Palestine. The two references to apes in the OT (1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21) refer to their importation by King Solomon with other treasures on board the ships of his mercantile fleet. There is some question concerning the origin of those primates. Some believe that the mention of “ivory” in the same verses suggests they came from East Africa and that they were indeed apes, that is, tailless primates. Others, believing they came from India or Ceylon, suggest that they were actually monkeys. There the baboon (genus Papeio), a large monkey, was considered sacred to the god Thoth. Males of that genus were kept in temples, and the more docile females were often kept as house pets. Such baboons frequently had some of their teeth removed or ground down to lessen the danger of their biting. A number of mummified baboons have been found in Egypt, indicating the high regard in which they were held.<\/p>\nAsp<\/p>\nPoisonous snake. Most biblical references to the asp (Dt 32:33) seem to be to the Egyptian cobra (Naja haje),<\/em> which conceals itself in holes, walls, and rocks and has the ability to expand its neck by raising its anterior ribs so as to enlarge the front of its breast into the shape of a flat disc. Its potent poison can cause death in 30 minutes. It attains a length of about 80 inches (2 meters). The fangs are permanently erect, not movable as in the vipers (the common poisonous snakes of North America; only the coral snake in America has permanently erect fangs). Cobra poison attacks the nervous system, causing muscular paralysis. The Egyptians looked upon it as a sacred creature; they regarded it as a protector since it fed on the rodents that ate their crops. The “fiery serpents” (Nm 21:6; Dt 8:15, both rsv<\/span>) may have been cobras; “fiery” probably refers to the burning fever caused by their venom. Isaiah 14:29 and 30:6 (“flying serpent”) may refer to the hood of the cobra.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\nAss<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Donkey (below).<\/p>\nBadger<\/p>\nSmall hoofed mammal. What the kjv<\/span> calls a “coney,” modern translations name “rock badger” (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7; Ps 104:18; Prv 30:26). The rock badger spoken of in the Bible is probably the Syrian rock hyrax (Hyrax syriaca),<\/em> the only species of hyrax found outside Africa. This small ungulate (having hooflike toenails) lives among rocks from the Dead Sea valley to Mt Hermon. It is strictly a herbivorous (plant-eating) animal about the size of a rabbit. It resembles a guinea pig more than a rabbit, having quite inconspicuous ears and a very small tail. It has broad nails with four toes on its forelegs and three on its hind legs, the toes being connected with skin almost like a web. Pads acting as sucking discs under its feet enable it to keep its footing on slippery rocks. With its yellow and brown fur, it is sometimes called the bear rat because of its resemblance to a tailless rat. It is also equipped with black whiskers that may be seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long.<\/p>\nThese rock badgers, or hyraxes, live together in colonies of from 6 to 50 animals, often sunning themselves on rocks. They are difficult to catch. Guards are posted, and if approaching danger is sighted, the whole group will scurry for cover, warned by the sharp whistles of the guards. Thus they are commended for taking refuge in the rocks (Ps 104:18) and are called wise for making “their houses in the rocks” (Prv 30:24, 26, kjv<\/span>). The badger is not a ruminant (does not chew its cud), but the motion of its jaws may suggest that it chews its cud. That is probably why it was included with other cud-chewing animals in the Jewish food laws (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7). It was forbidden to the Jews as food because it did not have cloven hooves. Some Arabs eat and even prize its meat.<\/p>\nBat<\/p>\nFlying mammals according to modern classification. They have hair and provide milk for their young. The Bible classifies them with other aerial creatures. Bats take shelter in caves, crevices, tree cavities, buildings, and also in exposed places on trees. In colder areas they hibernate or migrate. The normal resting position for a bat is hanging head downward. Bats “swim” through the air rather than fly because they move with their legs as well as with their wings.<\/p>\nThe bat’s thumb is free and terminates in a single hook claw used for climbing and hanging. The hind feet have five toes, all pointing the same way. The large chest accommodates the powerful muscles needed for flying. Because they orient themselves by echo location, the sense of hearing is very well developed.<\/p>\nMost bats are insect eaters, seizing insects in flight. Many insectivorous bats also eat some fruit. Other bats feed exclusively, usually in groups, on fruit and green vegetation. Fruit-eating bats generally live in the tropics where fruit is constantly ripening, although some have been found in the Holy Land. These bats tend to be larger than the insectivores, having a wingspread of up to five feet (1.5 meters).<\/p>\nA third group includes flower-eating bats that feed on pollen and nectar. These small bats with long pointed heads and long tongues are found only in tropical and semitropical regions. Three species of vampire bats, which do not occur in the Holy Land, eat blood by making a small incision and lapping it up. Carnivorous (meat-eating) bats prey on birds, lizards, and frogs. Fish-eating bats catch fish at or near the water surface.<\/p>\nEight varieties of bats are known in the Holy Land. One of them, the little brown bat (genus Myotis<\/em>), is worldwide in its distribution. It is insectivorous and probably has the widest distribution of any nonhuman terrestrial mammal. Brown bats are mostly cave dwellers. The females form maternity colonies that may number in the tens of thousands.<\/p>\nTwo species of mouse-tailed bats (genus Rhinopoma<\/em>) are found in the Holy Land. Their tails are nearly as long as the head and body combined. They are colonial, roosting in caves, rock clefts, wells, pyramids, palaces, and houses. Like the brown bat, they are insectivorous. The slit-faced or hollow-faced bats (genus Nycteris<\/em>) are also found in the Holy Land. They are insectivorous and roost in groups from 6 to 20.<\/p>\nThe bats found in the Holy Land vary in size from that of a mouse to the size of a rat; the largest species measures more than 20 inches (51 centimeters) across the wings. The bat was unclean to the Jews (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\nBear<\/p>\nLarge, heavy, big-headed mammal with short, powerful limbs, a short tail, and small eyes and ears. Bears have a “plantigrade” walk: they walk on both the sole and heel as humans do. The Palestinian bear is a Syrian version of the brown bear (Ursus arctos syriacus).<\/em> It can grow to a height of 6 feet (1.8 meters) and may weigh as much as 500 pounds (227 kilograms).<\/p>\nBears have an excellent sense of smell but less developed senses of sight and hearing. They are omnivorous (eating any kind of food); they subsist largely on vegetation, fruits, insects, and fish.<\/p>\nBears are usually peaceful and inoffensive, but if they think they must defend themselves (Lam 3:10) or their young (2 Sm 17:8; Prv 17:12; Hos 13:8), they may be formidable and dangerous adversaries. David boasted of his role as a bear killer (1 Sm 17:34-37). Since a blow from a bear’s paw can be fatal, David’s courage and strength as a young shepherd in running after a bear and wrenching one of his father’s sheep from its jaws were noteworthy.<\/p>\nSome biblical passages seem to imply that bears attacked for no apparent reason (e.g., Prv 28:15; Am 5:19). At other times they were God’s instruments of punishment, as in the story of Elisha and the two she-bears (2 Kgs 2:24). The bear and the lion, often mentioned together in the Bible (1 Sm 17:37), were the two largest and strongest beasts of prey in the Holy Land. Thus they symbolized both strength and terror (Am 5:19).<\/p>\nIn biblical times bears seem to have roamed all over Palestine. Today they are found only in the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains, and even there they are rare.<\/p>\nBee<\/p>\nOne of two domesticated insects (Apis mellifica),<\/em> the other being the silkworm. Bees gather nectar from flowers, transferring pollen from one flower to another in the process. It is believed that they convey the location of sources of nectar to other bees through a bee “dance,” which may indicate both distance and direction. Bees are sensitive to four colors: blue-green, yellow-green, blue-violet, and ultra-violet (invisible to humans).<\/p>\nThe wild bees of the Holy Land are especially noted for their ferocity in attack. Only the female “worker” bees sting people and animals, the virulence of their venom increasing in warm weather. A number of biblical passages allude to the irritable, vindictive nature of bees and to the painful stings they inflict (Dt 1:44; Ps 118:12; Is 7:18).<\/p>\nOne reference calls attention to the fact that in semidesert regions a dead animal’s carcass, stripped to the bone by jackals or vultures and dried in the sun, can provide wild bees an excellent place to start a new colony (Jgs 14:5-9).<\/p>\nThe Egyptians considered the bee sacred. In ancient Greece candles were made from beeswax. In the Holy Land, beekeeping was probably not practiced until the Hellenistic period (second century BC<\/span>), although Ezekiel 27:17 suggests that it may have been practiced earlier. If domestic honey was not available to the Hebrews, wild honey certainly was, and travelers would be on the lookout for caches of honey in rocky clefts and other likely places. The Philistines and the Hittites practiced beekeeping in their cities.<\/p>\nThe Bible contains many references to bees and bee products. A bee swarm was a valuable asset, though the price of honey itself was low. Honey was sometimes eaten with the honeycomb (Sg 5:1). Honey also had uses other than food, e.g., in embalming.<\/p>\nThe land of Israel was described as a land flowing with milk and honey. Honey was a major source of sweetening in the ancient Near East—hence, its importance (cf. Jgs 14:8-9). Actually the Hebrew word for “honey” may include not only bee honey but also the sweet syrup extracted from such fruits as figs, dates, and grapes. Thus “a land flowing with milk and honey” (Ex 3:8, rsv<\/span>) does not necessarily stand for a land of bees but for a land rich in sweetness.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Honey.<\/p>\nBehemoth<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Hippopotamus (below).<\/p>\nCamel<\/p>\nLarge beast of burden. Unintelligent, ill-natured, and quarrelsome, the camel (Camelus dromedarius)<\/em> is nevertheless a blessing to people living in the desert and on its borders because it is especially adapted to that habitat. It has been called the ship of the desert. Having thick elastic pads of fibrous tissue on its feet, it can walk on hot desert sands. It can go without water for long periods and can subsist on vegetation growing on the saline soils. The camel’s nostrils are pinched together and can be closed at will to prevent penetration of sand during violent sandstorms.<\/p>\nCamels are used for transporting both goods and people. A person riding a camel can cover from 60 to 75 miles (96.5 to 121 kilometers) in a day. A camel can carry a load weighing 600 pounds (272 kilograms) or more. Camels were used heavily in the spice trade (Gn 37:25) and traveled regularly in camel trains between Arabia, Egypt, and Assyria. They were also ridden in time of war (Jgs 6:5). A camel can even be hitched to a plow in areas where the land is cultivated.<\/p>\nThe hair shed by camels during the early spring is preserved and used in weaving cloth and making tents. As much as 10 pounds (4.5 kilograms) of hair can be obtained from one camel. A rough cloak of camel’s hair, as worn by John the Baptist (Mt 3:4), is still worn by Bedouins today. A camel’s hair garment was also the sign of the prophetic office (Zec 13:4).<\/p>\nTwo varieties of camel occur within the one-humped species, the slow burden-bearing camel referred to in Genesis 37:25 and the fast dromedary of 1 Samuel 30:17. The dromedary can stand seven feet (2.1 meters) tall and measure as much as nine feet (2.7 meters) from the muzzle to the tip of the tail. With its three-chambered stomach, which can hold from 15 to 30 quarts (14.2 to 28.4 liters) of liquid, it can go for as long as 5 days during the summer or 25 days in winter without drinking. The camel’s hump is a reserve store of fat, making it possible for the animal to subsist on very little food during a desert journey.<\/p>\nAnother species of camel, the Bactrian camel (Camelus bactrianus),<\/em> is also resident in the Holy Land. It has two humps. It is heavier, bigger, and has longer hair than the one-humped camel and is slower than the swift dromedary. Isaiah 21:7 may refer to the Bactrian camel; both kinds of camel are referred to in Esther 8:10 (kjv<\/span>). Camels ranked in importance with sheep, cattle, and asses in OT times. A third of the 66 biblical references to the camel lists it with other animals.<\/p>\nCamels are ruminants (cud-chewing mammals) but do not have cloven hooves. Thus, they were included in the list of unclean beasts, forbidden by the Israelites as food (Lv 11:4; Dt 14:7). They are eaten by Arabs, however, who also drink their milk (cf. Gn 32:15).<\/p>\nAbraham had camels in Egypt (Gn 12:16). At first Job had 3,000 camels (Jb 1:3) and after his recovery, 6,000 (Jb 42:12). Although wide use of camels does not seem to have begun until shortly before 1000 BC<\/span> (Jgs 6:5), Sumerian texts from the Old Babylonian period list camels and indicate that they had been domesticated. Camel bones and figurines have been found at various eastern archaeological sites dating from well before 1200 BC<\/span>.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\nCaterpillar<\/p>\nLarval stage of insects characterized by complete metamorphosis. Such insects pass through four stages: egg, larva or caterpillar, pupa, and adult. Bees, flies, moths, and butterflies all pass through a larval or caterpillar stage.<\/p>\nThe word “caterpillar” occurs three times in the nlt<\/span> (1 Kgs 8:37; 2 Chr 6:28; Ps 78:46). In the book of Joel that same Hebrew word is translated “locust” (1:4; 2:25, nlt<\/span>). The locust and grasshopper to which the Hebrew word refers have an incomplete type of metamorphosis with only three stages: egg, nymph, and adult. The nymph is a miniature adult in which the wings are not fully developed, though their outline may be present. There are several nymph stages known as instars. The reference is to one of the last instars, in which the wing structures are still folded together and enclosed in a sac but are nevertheless clearly recognizable. That form of the insect is about an inch (2.5 centimeters) long.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\nCattle<\/p>\nDomestic animals of the bovine species (Bos primigenius).<\/em> The OT often emphasized the beauty of cattle. Egypt was rich in cattle, especially in the Nile River delta area (Goshen), where the Hebrews settled under Joseph.<\/p>\nSome scholars believe that milk rather than meat was the foremost consideration in the domestication of cattle and that in early civilizations meat supplies came chiefly from wild game. Cattle also supplied strong hides that supplanted wood in the manufacture of shields. Their dung was a source of fuel when wood was scarce (Ez 4:15). They were used as beasts of burden and for plowing. Development of wheeled transportation was associated more closely with cattle than with any other animal.<\/p>\nThe biblical term “cattle” often refers to all domesticated animals or livestock (Gn 1:24; 2:20; 7:23; 47:6, 16-17; Ex 9:3-7; Nm 3:41, 45). Occasionally, the term was used to refer to all large domestic animals (Nm 31:9; 32:26), although sometimes the word as used in the kjv<\/span> refers only to sheep and goats (Gn 30:32, 39, 43; 31:8, 10; Is 7:25; 43:23).<\/p>\nProbably several kinds of cattle were domesticated in the Holy Land. Small, short-legged, black or brown shorthorn cattle were found in the southern part of Judah; that type submitted easily to the yoke and was prominent in agricultural operations. Along the coast a larger variety was found, and the wild districts east of the Jordan River were populated with a breed of huge black cattle.<\/p>\nCattle breeding was widely practiced by the patriarchs (cf. Gn 32:15; Jb 21:10). Strict laws in Mesopotamia, as well as in Israel, penalized the owner of a bull that gored a man or other cattle (Ex 21:28-36). Bulls were sometimes employed figuratively as pictures of strength or violence (Dt 33:17; Pss 22:12; 68:30; Is 10:13). For breeding purposes one bull is normally adequate for about 30 cows, but many more were kept since bulls were widely used in Israel for sacrifices. They might be used as a general sacrifice (Lv 22:23; Nm 23:1) or for special sacrifices (Jgs 6:25; 1 Sm 1:24). Particular sacrifices were offered at the consecration of priests (Ex 29:1), consecration of an altar (Nm 7), purification of the Levites (Nm 8), sin offerings (Lv 16), day of the new moon (Nm 28:11-14), Passover (Nm 28:19), Feast of Weeks (Nm 28:27), Feast of Trumpets (Nm 29:1-2), Day of Atonement (Nm 29:7-9), and the Feast of Tabernacles (Nm 29:12-38). The Feast of Tabernacles required the largest number of bulls for burnt offerings of all the annual feasts, with a total of 71 being slaughtered during the course of eight days.<\/p>\nCalves were sometimes referred to as “sons of the herd” in the original Hebrew (Gn 18:8; 1 Sm 6:7; 14:32). The calf, a symbol of peacefulness (Is 11:6), was also used figuratively to refer to the weak (Ps 68:30). A calf’s head decorated the back of Solomon’s throne (1 Kgs 10:19). Calves were sometimes fattened in stalls to keep them from running off weight in the field (Am 6:4; Mal 4:2; Lk 15:23) or were kept around the house; the witch of Endor kept a calf in her house that she killed and served to Saul and his men (1 Sm 28:24-25). Calves supplied veal (Gn 18:7), considered a delicacy by the wealthy; Amos referred to stall-fattened calves in a denunciation of luxurious and careless living (Am 6:4). Calves also supplied meat for all Saul’s armies at the great slaughter of the Philistines (1 Sm 14:32). The “fatted calf” served roasted or boiled was gourmet fare, suitable for the finest banquet (Gn 18:7; Mt 22:4; Lk 15:23).<\/p>\nCattle were subject to the law of firstlings (Ex 13:12). They were a mark of wealth (Gn 13:2) and were considered proper booty of war (Jos 8:2). Aaron, the first high priest, made a golden calf as a rival to the ark of the covenant (Ex 32; Dt 9:16, 21). Even though he represented the calf as an image of the invisible God, it was especially offensive because the calf was a fertility symbol related to Egyptian and Canaanite practices. Two calves were later made by Jeroboam I of Israel (930–909 BC<\/span>) for his shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:28-33). Hosea’s prophetic denunciations of calf worship were directed at those shrines (Hos 8:5-6; 13:2).<\/p>\nAn ox is an adult castrated bull. A steer is a young ox. Oxen were used to do work (Nm 7:3; Dt 22:10; 25:4), though for moving heavy objects, cows were typically favored over bulls because of their more docile nature. Oxen were also used as pack animals (1 Chr 12:40, although they did not have the endurance of the ass, camel, or mule. They usually fed on grass (Nm 22:4; Ps 106:20), but they also ate straw (Is 11:7) and salted fodder (Is 30:24) and could be kept in a stable (Lk 13:15). Oxen could not be offered as sacrifices because they had been castrated (Lv 22:24). They could be used for food but were rarely eaten. Possession of an ox and an ass was regarded as the bare minimum for existence in the ancient Palestinian agriculture economy (Jb 24:3; cf. Ex 20:17).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Agriculture; Food and Food Preparation; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\nChameleon<\/p>\nLizard characterized by its ability to change color according to its surroundings (Chameleon vulgaris).<\/em> To the Israelites the chameleon was ritually unclean (Lv 11:30). The Hebrew word for chameleon is derived from a word meaning “to pant.” A lizard’s lungs are very large, and in ancient times lizards were believed to live on air. A chameleon’s eyes move independently of each other; so at times one eye may be turned upward and the other downward. Chameleons live in trees and bushes, clinging to branches with their long tails.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\nCoral<\/p>\nCalcareous (lime-containing) skeletons of relatively simple marine organisms (Corallium rubrum).<\/em> Red coral from the Mediterranean and Red Seas is widely used for jewelry and for medicinal purposes. While the animal is alive, the coral is green in color and shrublike in appearance, looking rather like an underwater plant since the coral animals are immobil. When the coral is removed from the water, it becomes hard and red in color.<\/p>\nIn ancient times coral was sometimes used as money, along with precious stones, pearls, and gold. Some believe the biblical reference in Lamentations 4:7 (rsv<\/span>) is to pearls rather than to coral, but it is probable that the references in Job 28:18 and Ezekiel 27:16 are to the red coral (see nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nCricket<\/p>\nInsect of the order Orthptera related to grasshoppers and locusts. According to Leviticus 11:22, the cricket was edible. The reference may be to one of the growth stages of the locust.<\/p>\nThe kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word as “beetle.” Beetles are insects with chewing mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the fore pair being hard and sheathlike and the hind pair being membranous and folded under the fore pair. Some beetles are carnivorous, others are chiefly herbivorous. Some are aquatic, some produce a secretion that blisters the skin, some damage fabrics, some damage crops, and some feed on other insects that are harmful to humans. In ancient Egypt the beetle, or sacred scarab, was a symbol of the sun god Ra. Scarab seals and amulets were extremely popular in Egypt.<\/p>\nCrocodile<\/p>\nLargest of all existing reptiles (Crocodilus vulgaris),<\/em> attaining a length of well over 20 feet (6 meters). Crocodiles are characterized by large lizardlike bodies supported by short legs. The head terminates in a flattened snout armed with strong conical teeth, each of which is implanted in a distinct socket. New teeth growing from beneath continually replace those in use. The toes are webbed. The back and tail are protected by quadrangular horny shields of varying sizes arranged in regular rows and in contact with one another at the edges. The eyes are covered with movable lids that can be closed when the animal enters the water.<\/p>\nThe crocodile spends most of its time in the water where it feeds mainly on fish but also on aquatic birds and even small animals that come down to the water’s edge to drink. It is surprisingly fast and agile on dry land, even though its legs are so short that its belly and tail drag across the earth leaving a distinct path.<\/p>\nUntil the beginning of the 20th century, the crocodile was found in the marshes and small coastal rivers of western Palestine. A first-century Roman writer, Pliny, referred to a place in the Holy Land called Crocodeilopolis (“crocodile city”) to the south of Mt Carmel, and visitors to the Holy Land as late as the 19th century reported seeing crocodiles in that general region.<\/p>\nThe description of “Leviathan” in Job 41 seems to be based on the crocodile (thus the translation of the nlt<\/span>). The “dragon” of Ezekiel 29:3, used figuratively of the Egyptian pharaoh, may be a reference to the crocodile.<\/p>\nDeer<\/p>\nLarge ruminant (cud-chewing) animals. Only the males have antlers (branching horns). Deer antlers grow annually and are solid, in contrast to those of the antelope and the gazelle. Fully developed antlers are devoid of any covering of skin or horn and, for all practical purposes, may be regarded as a mass of dead bone carried for a certain time by the living animal.<\/p>\nThe end of the deer’s muzzle is naked in all species. The stomach is divided into a series of compartments, some of which are used to store partly chewed food. The food is later regurgitated, rechewed, and finally swallowed into a section of the stomach where true digestion takes place.<\/p>\nThree species of deer were known in Palestine: the red deer (Cervus elaphus),<\/em> the Persian fallow deer (Dama mesopotamica),<\/em> and the roe deer (Capreolus capreolus).<\/em> All are now extinct there. The last deer were hunted in the Holy Land in 1914. The red deer referred to in the Bible as “hart” (male), “stag” (male), or “hind” (female) stood about four feet (1.2 meters) high at the shoulder. It was gregarious (living in herds or flocks), each group remaining in a definite territory. Red deer grazed and browsed during the morning and late afternoon (Lam 1:6). The sexes remained in separate herds. The red deer was known for its leaping (Is 35:6) and sure-footedness in the mountains (Ps 18:33; Sg 2:8-9, 17; 8:14; Hb 3:19).<\/p>\nThe antlers of the Persian fallow deer (1 Kgs 4:23) were large, flattened, and palmated (shaped like an open palm with fingers extended), and its coat was a yellowbrown. It traveled in small groups, feeding mainly on grass in the morning and evening.<\/p>\nThe roe deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23) was a small, graceful animal, dark reddish brown in summer and yellowish gray in winter. Its antlers were about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long and had three points. The roe deer preferred sparsely wooded valleys and the lower slopes of mountains, grazing in open grasslands. It usually associated in family groups made up of the doe and her offspring. They were shy, yet very curious. The roe deer barked like a dog when disturbed, and they were excellent swimmers.<\/p>\nThere is some question as to whether the roe deer is actually referred to in such passages as 1 Kings 4:23; references may be to the fallow deer, although that animal does not seem to have lived in the southern part of Palestine around the Sinai Desert because of its need for ample amounts of food and water. Fallow deer were found in northern Palestine.<\/p>\nThe hart (the male red deer) was listed among the clean beasts that Jewish law permitted as food (Dt 12:15, 22; 14:5), but deer were not listed among the animals appropriate for sacrifice. The hind (female red deer) normally gave birth to one calf at a time, though twins were born with some degree of regularity (Jb 39:1; Ps 29:9, kjv<\/span>; Jer 14:5). The gestation period was about 40 weeks. When it was about to give birth, the hind looked for a secure hiding place, preferably in the dense undergrowth of the forest where it could find natural protection for the tiny calf. During the first few days after birth, the mother never went far from her young. The fawn was able to stand on its own legs a few hours after birth. The solicitous care by the hind for her calf during the first days of its life is hinted at in a touching way in Jeremiah 14:4-5, where only a severe drought is said to drive the hind from her calf. Job 39:1-4 describes the calving of the hinds. The hind illustrated grace and charm (Gn 49:21; Prv 5:19), and its dark, gentle eyes and graceful limbs were used to describe the beauty of a woman (Prv 5:18-19).<\/p>\nDog<\/p>\nProbably the earliest domesticated animal (Canis familiaris),<\/em> used very early in hunting. The modern dog is believed to have come from the Indian wolf (Canis lupus pallipes).<\/em> The dogs of biblical times probably looked like a modern German shepherd, with short pointed ears, a pointed nose, and a long tail.<\/p>\nThe dog was generally looked down upon in biblical times (Prv 26:11; 2 Pt 2:22). The biblical writers did not share modern sentiments about dogs being man’s best friends. The dog was pictured as a scavenger, haunting streets and dumps (Ex 22:31; 1 Kgs 22:38; Mt 15:26; Lk 16:21). Human corpses could become the spoil of dogs (2 Kgs 9:35-36). In general, dogs served the same function as vultures and other birds of prey. Most of the 41 references in the Scriptures to dogs show strong disfavor. Dogs were considered cowardly, filthy creatures.<\/p>\nDogs used in hunting occur in paintings in Egyptian tombs, and there is a reference to dogs herding sheep in Job 30:1. One good quality of dogs highly esteemed by the Israelites was watchfulness (Is 56:10). In general, however, in biblical times “dog” was a term of contempt (1 Sm 17:43; 2 Sm 16:9) and was used of overly submissive persons (2 Sm 9:8; 2 Kgs 8:13) and of evil persons (Is 56:10-11; Mt 7:6; Phil 3:2; Rv 22:15).<\/p>\nDogs, like pigs, were voracious and omnivorous (eating any kind of food). In response to a Gentile woman’s request that he heal her daughter, Jesus used the metaphor of throwing household food scraps to dogs (Mt 15:22-28; Mk 7:25-30). At the time of Jesus, the word “dog” was a standard Jewish term of contempt for Gentiles who, like dogs, were considered unclean, although the diminutive form of the word, used by Jesus, softened this considerably. Seeing her faith, Jesus granted the woman’s request, giving a non-Jew some of “the children’s bread.”<\/p>\nDonkey<\/p>\nBeast of burden. The donkey of the Holy Land (Equus asinus)<\/em> was quite different from the European donkey of today, which is usually a small, stubborn animal. In biblical times the donkey was a beautiful, stately, friendly animal. Its color was usually reddish brown. Three wild races have been described, all from Africa. The race from northwest Africa is extinct; the one from northeast Africa, if not extinct, is close to extinction; the Somalian race, which survives, did not play an important part in domestication. The northeast African race, the Nubian donkey, was evidently domesticated in the Nile River region in early historic times. The donkey was used as a mount from the time of domestication on. It is first mentioned in the Bible among the animals that Abraham acquired in Egypt (Gn 12:16). The donkey was primarily a beast of burden, driven but not bridled. From the time of the Middle Kingdom on (c. 2040 BC<\/span>), it was used for riding in Egypt, but only the Jews and Nubians rode donkeys regularly. The donkey was also used for threshing grain and for pulling the plow. In Arab countries today peasants plow with a donkey and a cow or camel hitched together. In Israel the law forbade plowing with a donkey and an ox hitched together (Dt 22:10). Until the time of Solomon (960 BC<\/span>), horses were not used in Palestine. From that time on, the horse was ridden by warriors; the donkey was used by those who were traveling peaceably.<\/p>\nThe donkey was held in high regard by the Jews and was considered an economic asset. An individual had to have a donkey for minimum existence (Jb 24:3), and wealth was frequently counted by the number of donkeys one possessed (Gn 12:16; 24:35). The donkey was considered an acceptable gift (Gn 32:13-15). It was allowed to rest on the Sabbath (Dt 5:14). Women in biblical times often used the donkey as a riding animal (Jos 15:18; 1 Sm 25:23; 2 Kgs 4:24); often a special driver would help a woman guide the animal, running along at its side. If a married couple possessed only one donkey, the husband usually walked alongside while the wife rode (Ex 4:20).<\/p>\nThe people of Israel returning from Babylon had ten times as many donkeys as horses and camels (Ezr 2:66-67; Neh 7:68-69). Job’s wealth was indicated by the fact that he had 500 she-donkeys before catastrophe hit him (Jb 1:3); after his recovery he had 1,000 donkeys (Jb 42:12). Joseph’s brothers used donkeys to transport the grain they purchased in Egypt (Gn 42:26; 43:24). Abigail transported food on donkeys to David and his troops during their conflict with Saul (1 Sm 25:18). David assigned one of the 12 managers of his royal estates to look after his donkeys exclusively (1 Chr 27:30).<\/p>\nThe onager, or Syrian wild donkey (Equus hemionus hemihippus)<\/em>, is an intermediate between the true horse and the true donkey. Its ears are longer than those of a horse but shorter than those of a donkey. The front hooves are narrow; there are chestnuts (callouslike spots on the inside of the knees) on the front legs only, and the tail is short haired for a long distance from its root so that it appears to be tufted.<\/p>\nThe Sumerians (ancient Mesopotamians) were able to domesticate the onager, which was eventually replaced by the horse. It was used to draw chariots in Ur; a number of onagers were buried with their vehicles in a royal grave that dates from about 2500 BC<\/span>. Later the wild onager was a favorite hunter’s prize for Babylonian and Assyrian kings.<\/p>\nThe onager was very common in the steppe lands near Israel, where it was described as a freedom-loving desert animal (Jb 24:5; 39:5-8; Ps 104:11; Is 32:14; Jer 2:24; Hos 8:9). Ishmael was described as “free and untamed as a wild donkey” (Gn 16:12, nlt<\/span>)—that is, one who could not adjust to domestic life. Drought seems to have been responsible for the population decline of the onager in biblical times (Jer 14:6). The modern onager (Equus hemionus onager)<\/em> is slightly larger than the Syrian wild donkey that is extinct.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\nDragon<\/p>\nAny one of a number of monstrous land and sea creatures. In biblical usage, “dragon” does not refer to the huge, fire-breathing, winged reptile of European folklore. The translators of the kjv<\/span> used the term to translate two Hebrew words that are usually rendered more precisely in modern translations. One word referred to desert animals; most scholars agree with the niv<\/span> that “jackals” is its proper meaning (Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; Jer 9:11; Mal 1:3). See<\/em> Jackal (below).<\/p>\nThe other Hebrew word translated “dragon” is harder to define. It was frequently used in reference to serpents (so translated in the rsv<\/span>: Ex 7:9-12; Dt 32:33; Ps 91:13). In other rsv<\/span> passages it is translated “sea monster” (Gn 1:21; Jb 7:12; Ps 148:7). The exact identity of such sea monsters is not known. Several rsv<\/span> passages retain the English “dragon.” In two of them (Ps 74:13; Is 27:1), the context indicates that sea monsters are meant. In three others (Is 51:9; Ez 29:3; 32:2) “dragon” seems to refer to the crocodile, a figurative reference to the Egyptian pharaoh at the time of the exodus. Jeremiah 51:34 (translated “monster” in the rsv<\/span>) may also refer to a voracious creature such as a crocodile. See<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\nBabylonian myths described monsters and dragons in primordial conflict with the god Marduk; they represented the principle of evil. In its figurative usages in Scripture, “dragon” has a similar significance, especially in the prophetic books. In the book of Revelation it is a symbol of Satan, the archenemy of God and his people (Rv 12:3-17; 13:2, 4, 11; 16:13; 20:2).<\/p>\nFish<\/p>\nAquatic animals frequently mentioned in the Bible without names or descriptions that enable us to identify the particular species. Since time immemorial, fish have constituted one of the staple foods of humanity, and they still serve as the chief source of protein in many parts of the world. The trade in fish was highly developed in biblical times. For example, one of the gates in Jerusalem was called the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3; Zep 1:10). The law in Leviticus 11:9-12 permitted the Jews to eat fish, but only those having both fins and scales. Scaleless fish such as catfish were forbidden, even though they had fins.<\/p>\nEgyptian paintings depict various methods of fishing, and the Philistines fished in the Mediterranean Sea. Since the people of Israel were not a seafaring nation, it is safe to assume that most of their fish came from freshwater lakes and rivers, especially the Sea of Galilee. Some 36 species of fish have been identified in that lake, including varieties of perch, carp, barbel, “sardine,” and catfish.<\/p>\nThe method of fishing characteristic of NT times was the dragnet. After a boat had put out into the deep (Lk 5:4), a large net would be thrown out from it and then dragged toward shore by the rowers in the boat, possibly with the help of a crew in another boat. The catch was sorted out on shore (Mt 13:47-48). Fishing was usually carried out at night when the coolness of the water brought fish closer to the surface and when they could not see the approaching nets.<\/p>\nThe Jews also fished by hook and line (Mt 17:27), a few by spear (Jb 41:7), and some by the throw net (Ez 47:10). Habakkuk refers to hook-and-line fishing, netting, and seining (1:15).<\/p>\nVery early in the history of the Christian church the fish became a symbol for Christ and the faith. It was scratched on the walls of Roman catacombs and may be seen today decorating walls, altars, pews, and vestments. The symbol came into use because the Greek word for “fish” (<\/em>ichthus<\/span>)<\/em> is composed of the first letter of each word in the Greek phrase “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior.” See<\/em> Whale (below).<\/p>\nFlea<\/p>\nTiny, irritating insect (1 Sm 24:14; 26:20, nlt<\/span>). Many species of fleas occur in Palestine, the most common being Pulex irritans.<\/em> About a thousand species are known around the world. Fleas are wingless parasites that have sharp jaws and suck out blood from the bodies of humans and animals. The body is wedge shaped, enabling the flea to burrow into folds of skin and hide there. The eggs, laid by the female in dust heaps in the corners of rooms, hatch into small, white larvae that pupate (a nonfeeding stage) in a cocoon. Soon adult fleas appear that immediately attach themselves to the body of a host. The female requires blood for the development of her eggs.<\/p>\nA flea bite is painful and causes some swelling and itching. Fleas are attracted by warmth. With favorable moisture and temperature, adult fleas can live a year or longer without food, but they are voracious feeders. The most dangerous fleas are those of the rat that transmit the organism responsible for bubonic plague. There were 41 recorded epidemics of bubonic plague before the Christian era.<\/p>\nFly<\/p>\nInsects of the order Diptera, which have one pair of wings. Many winged insects of other orders, however, are also called flies, such as the dragonfly or butterfly.<\/p>\nAs in almost all parts of the world, flies are abundant in Palestine. One of the most numerous is the common housefly (Musca domestica),<\/em> found chiefly around dung heaps and garbage. The female lays her eggs, out of which emerge white maggots that feed on refuse. After a few days the maggot develops into a cocoon out of which emerges the adult housefly. In the summer the whole cycle lasts about 12 days, so that a fly can breed about 20 generations a year.<\/p>\nAnother fly common to Palestine is the botfly (family Oestridae). It causes much discomfort among livestock by irritating them and spreading diseases. Tabanid flies (family Tabanidae), including the horsefly (genus Tabanus<\/em>) and related species, are also found in Palestine. Both the botfly and horsefly are known as gadflies because of the persistent distress they inflict. Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar is spoken of as a gadfly in view of his invasion of Egypt (Jer 46:20).<\/p>\nThe fourth plague in Egypt just before the exodus featured “swarms of flies” (Ex 8:21-31, nlt<\/span>; cf. Pss 78:45; 105:31). Those swarms may have been made up of any or all the flies mentioned above. The maggots mentioned in Job 25:6 and Isaiah 14:11 and the worms in Exodus 16:24 and Job 7:5 and 17:14 were probably fly larvae.<\/p>\nA proverb quoted in Ecclesiastes 10:1 probably refers to the housefly, which would be attracted to an open, perfumed ointment bottle. Once inside it would drown and eventually decay, causing the ointment to spoil and stink. The fly is also referred to in Isaiah 7:18 where it symbolizes Egypt. Isaiah may have had in mind a horsefly (Tabanus arenivagus)<\/em> that attacks both humans and animals.<\/p>\nPhilistine inhabitants of the city of Ekron worshiped a god named Baal-zebul, meaning “Lord of the high places.” The Hebrews mockingly spoke of Baal-zebub, meaning “Lord of the flies” (2 Kgs 1:2). The NT form is Beelzebub (e.g., Mt 10:25; 12:24, 27).<\/p>\nFox<\/p>\nSmall, doglike carnivore with a bushy tail that is about half its body length. The red fox of the Holy Land (Vulpes palaetinae)<\/em> is similar to the North American red fox; it is smaller than a wolf and is normally a nocturnal solitary animal. The omnivorous fox eats almost any kind of food—fruits, plants, mice, beetles, and birds—but seldom touches carrion. It loves the sweet juice of grapes, but it also burrows underground tunnels that can destroy the vines (Sg 2:15). The fox is intelligent and known for its slyness (Lk 13:32). It has considerable endurance and can run at speeds up to 30 miles (48 kilometers) per hour. The Jews rebuilding Jerusalem’s wall were taunted by the wisecrack that even a fox jumping on their wall would knock it over (Neh 4:3).<\/p>\nThe Egyptian fox (Vulpes niloticus)<\/em> is found in the central and southern parts of the Holy Land. It is somewhat smaller than the common red fox. Its back is rust colored and its belly light. The Syrian fox (Vulpes flavescens)<\/em> that lives in the northern part of the Holy Land is shiny gold in color.<\/p>\nSome OT references such as Psalm 63:10 and Lamentations 5:18 are translated “fox” in the kjv<\/span> but probably refer to jackals. Jackals, not foxes, hunt in packs and tend to act as scavengers.<\/p>\nFrog<\/p>\nAmphibian (genus Rana<\/em>), living part of its life in the water and part on land.<\/p>\nFrogs and toads are covered with soft, hairless skin and lack a tail in the adult stage. The hind legs are much longer and more powerfully developed than the forelegs so that the animals are able to jump large distances. It has been suggested that the frog referred to in Scripture is an edible one, Rana ridibunda,<\/em> one of the aquatic frogs found in Egypt and in the stagnant waters of the Holy Land.<\/p>\nThe female frog lays her eggs in the water; after about a week the eggs hatch into tadpoles. Gradually through metamorphosis the tail is lost and limbs are acquired. Frogs must maintain a moist skin since they take oxygen through the skin as well as through their lungs; thus they must always remain close to water. They feed on insects and worms.<\/p>\nFrogs are found throughout the Palestinian lowlands, where their croaking is heard in the spring and on summer evenings. The Israelites seem to have associated frogs primarily with sliminess and foulness. They fell into the category of creeping or swarming creatures, which in general were ritually unclean (Lv 11:29-31). Since the frog was not specifically listed, however, rabbis did not consider it one of the animals that defiled human beings through contact.<\/p>\nIn Revelation 16:13 certain foul spirits are said to look like frogs. The ancient Egyptians made the frog a symbol of life and birth and an image of Heqet, the patron goddess of birth. She is depicted with a frog’s head giving life to the newborn. Thus that deity was discredited when the power of God afflicted Egypt in the second of the ten plagues on the Egyptians with the very animal that was her symbol (Ex 8:1-14; Pss 78:45; 105:30). The frog in question may have been the spotted frog of Egypt (Rana punctata,<\/em> or Rana ridibunda).<\/em><\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\nGazelle<\/p>\nSmall, dainty, graceful antelope with hollow recurved horns on both sexes. Two varieties exist in the Holy Land, the dorcas gazelle (Gazella dorcas),<\/em> which is pale fawn in color and up to 22 inches (56 centimeters) tall, and the Arabian gazelle (Gazella arabica),<\/em> which is a dark smoky color and up to 25 inches (63.5 centimeters) tall.<\/p>\nGazelles are still quite common throughout the desert and steppe areas of the Holy Land, especially in the Negev Desert. Herds usually consist of from 5 to 10 animals, but some varieties assemble in large migratory herds in the fall to relocate to lower elevations and new feeding grounds. Gazelles are herbivorous (plant eating). They are very shy and post guards to warn the herd of approaching danger.<\/p>\nIn biblical times the gazelle was probably the game animal most hunted by the Jews (Prv 6:5; Is 13:14). Pharaoh Tutankhamen hunted gazelles and ostriches. The gazelle is said to have graced Solomon’s table (1 Kgs 4:23). Gazelles were not easy to catch because of their great speed (2 Sm 2:18; 1 Chr 12:8; Prv 6:5); they surpass the deer in swiftness. They were trapped in various ways—encircled with nets, driven into enclosures with pitfalls, or forced into narrow valleys and shot with arrows. The Bedouin hunt gazelle with falcons and dogs; the falcon annoys the gazelle, striking it on the head and injuring it so that the dogs can overtake it.<\/p>\nThe gazelle is referred to in Song of Songs 2:9, 17; 4:5; 7:3; 8:14, where it is an image of feminine beauty.<\/p>\nGecko<\/p>\nReptile of the family Gekkonidae, referred to in Leviticus 11:30. In Jewish food law it was a ritually unclean lizard. There are seven species of geckos in the Holy Land (including Hemidactylus turcicus<\/em> and Ptyodactylus hasselquistii,<\/em> all insectivorous—insect eating). The gecko makes a low mourning sound by vibrating its tongue rapidly against the roof of its mouth. In legend the gecko was said to cause leprosy by crawling across a person’s body.<\/p>\nAnother name for the gecko is the wall lizard, so named because it can walk upside down on ceilings with the aid of the suction discs on its toes—but it often plops down into the middle of the home. Since it was considered unclean, such an intrusion would have been a disgusting nuisance to Jewish households (Lv 11:31-38).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\nGnat<\/p>\nAny very small fly, in common and biblical usage. According to the nlt<\/span>, the third plague in Egypt before the exodus consisted of gnats (Ex 8:16-18; Ps 105:31). The kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word there as “lice,” but the breeding pattern described in Exodus 8—insects rising from the dust—seems to fit gnats better than lice. Since “gnat” is a general term, the small flies of that plague may have included several small species such as mosquitos, harvester gnats, midges, or sand flies.<\/p>\nThe sand fly inflicts a far more painful bite than the mosquito. Further, it does not betray itself by a buzzing noise in flight and is so small that it penetrates most mosquito netting.<\/p>\nGnats were drawn to wine while it was fermenting. The Pharisees in particular would strain their wine to avoid consuming unclean insects (Mt 23:24).<\/p>\nGoat<\/p>\nCloven-hooved mammals (genus Capra<\/em>) with large eyes and big, floppy ears that constantly twitch. Both males and females have backward arching horns. The Palestinian goat is a ruminant (cud-chewing animal) of lighter build than the sheep.<\/p>\nThe goat was probably the earliest ruminant to be domesticated. Its wild ancestor seems to have been the Gezoar goat (Capra aegagrus).<\/em> Wild goats are believed to have been domesticated very early in Palestine. The goat of Bible times was probably the Syrian or Mamber variety (Capra hircus mambrica).<\/em> Domesticated goats may have as many as four kids in a litter, whereas wild goats bear only one or two.<\/p>\nThe Palestinian goat was commonly black. Speckled and spotted goats were a rarity, and for that reason Jacob’s request for those goats in Genesis 30:32 appeared very modest. There may also have been red goats (cf. 1 Sm 16:12; 19:13, where goat’s hair was used to imitate David’s hair, which was “ruddy” or auburn).<\/p>\nAlmost every part of the goat was used by the Israelites. The whole goat was used for sacrifice. Its flesh served as meat (Lv 7:23; Dt 14:4), and it was the principal source of milk (Prv 27:27). Goats were sheared in the late spring, and the goat hair was used for weaving tent cloth and for various domestic purposes (Ex 36:14; 1 Sm 19:13, 16). The tabernacle at Mt Sinai was made of goat’s hair blankets (Ex 26:7).<\/p>\nAdult male goats were generally not eaten because of their strong flavor and toughness and also because they were necessary to insure the flock’s increase. Young kids, however, were usually the chief meat for a feast and were offered to visitors as a symbol of hospitality. Goat milk is richer than the milk of cows and sheep and evidently had broader uses. A good goat gives three quarts of milk a day, from which a rich butter and buttermilk can be made. The average Hebrew family could have lived almost entirely on a single goat’s production.<\/p>\nGoatskin was tanned as leather, and the whole hide was turned into a skin bottle by sewing shut leg and neck apertures (Gn 21:14; Jos 9:4). Goatskin had many uses, including the construction of Hebrew musical instruments. The nebal, a large harp, was made with goatskin for its base sound. Drums had goatskin coverings.<\/p>\nGoats were herded with sheep in biblical times, but each group remained separate following its own bell-laden leader. Jesus was evidently referring to their common herding in his description of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\nBecause of their wool, sheep are valued more than goats. However, where pasture and water are scarce and thorny shrubs dominate over grass, sheep are difficult to keep and goats become important. They can live under conditions that suit neither cows nor sheep, producing large quantities of milk. The goat does not supply fat as the sheep does, and since its hair is coarse its wool is rather scarce. Goat-hair cloth called cilicium was used to make tents.<\/p>\nGoats have voracious appetites. They also were responsible for much damage done to the land of Palestine, breaking down terraces, destroying forests, and bringing about soil erosion by eating off all cover.<\/p>\nThe goat was recognized as a form of wealth, subject to the law of firstlings (Nm 18:17). It had to be eight days old before it could be offered as a sacrifice. A year-old male goat was one of the animals offered at the Passover (28:22), and two goats were offered on the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:7-10). The goat was also used for other specific sacrifices.<\/p>\nThe ibex, a type of wild goat (Capra ibex nubiana),<\/em> still lives in small numbers on the cliffs close to the Dead Sea. That it was known in ancient times is evident from rock carvings. It is distinguished from the true wild goat by having a more compact rump and horns that are slender and curved back. Its slender legs and sharp cloven hooves enable it to cling to narrow rock ledges, to jump between them, and to climb steep cliffs.<\/p>\nUsually the ibex is found in rugged mountain country among rocky crags and meadows just below the snow line (Ps 104:18). In Job 39:1 they are referred to as “mountain goats.” They frequently gather in herds of 5 to 20. They graze and browse, being active in the afternoon and sometimes feeding through the night. The large horn of the ibex was at one period made into the shofar that was blown in the second Jerusalem temple to announce the new year and the jubilee year.<\/p>\nThe goat was often used in a figurative and symbolic sense by the writers of the Bible: in Song of Songs 4:1 and 6:5 for the bride’s black hair; in Matthew 25:31-46 for the wicked; and in Ezekiel 34:17 and Daniel 8:5-8 for various human leaders.<\/p>\nGrasshopper<\/p>\nLarge insects of the Orthoptera order. They have chewing or biting mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the front pair of which is narrow and somewhat thickened and the hind pair membranous and used for flying. When not in use the flight wings are folded beneath the protective front wings like a fan against the body. By rubbing their wings together, male grasshoppers produce sounds that both males and females can detect. Grasshoppers pass through a partial metamorphosis; the egg hatches into a juvenile nymph that looks like an adult except for its smaller size and undeveloped wings. After several months the nymph becomes a winged adult.<\/p>\nThe terms “grasshopper” and “locust” are often used interchangeably. Actually the locust is a kind of grasshopper. Also confusing is the fact that other insects such as cicadas are sometimes called locusts. The difference between grasshoppers and locusts depends more on behavior than appearance. Grasshoppers are individual insects that lead solitary lives and do not migrate. The same insects when migrating in a swarm are called migratory grasshoppers or locusts. Elimination of their food supply by drought, flood, or fire may lead to migration. Climatic factors such as a warm dry winter also stimulate migrations.<\/p>\nGrasshoppers and locusts have been a staple food in the Middle East and also among the Indians of the American Southwest. To the Israelites the grasshopper was considered ritually clean and could be eaten (Lv 11:22).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\nHare<\/p>\nAnimal of the genus and species Lepus europaeus judaeus, Lepus capensis,<\/em> and Lepus arabicus.<\/em> It is found in open country, often near or on cultivated lands, and in woods, usually deciduous rather than evergreen. It is an herbivorous rodent and is different from the rabbit, which is not found in Palestine. Although it is not a true ruminant according to modern classification (because it does not have a four-chambered stomach), the hare does rechew its food. It has a process of partial regurgitation of material too hard for the cells in the stomach to absorb initially; thus, the hare actually chews food previously swallowed.<\/p>\nNear Eastern hares have very long ears and large hind feet; their feet are well furred. They are similar to American jackrabbits, which are true hares. Hares do not dig or occupy burrows the way rabbits do. Hares are mainly nocturnal and spend their inactive hours hiding in vegetation. They eat grasses and herbaceous matter as well as twigs and young bark of woody plants. Hares breed with great rapidity—the young attaining sexual maturity at six months after birth.<\/p>\nThe hare was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:6; Dt 14:7), evidently because although it appeared to chew its cud, it did not have cloven hooves. Consumption of hares has also been forbidden among the Arabs, Chinese, and Lapps, but the hare was widely hunted by other people in ancient and modern times. Its great speed, prolific breeding, timidity, and caution have saved it from extermination by its many enemies.<\/p>\nHippopotamus<\/p>\nLarge beast of problematic interpretation. Some early interpreters thought it referred to the elephant, others to the wild ox, the mammoth, or any large animal. It was called “behemoth” by the kjv<\/span> translators. Today it is generally agreed that the reference is to the hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius),<\/em> a large, thick-skinned, amphibious mammal, an ungulate (having hooflike toenails) with a large head, a bulky, hairless body, and short legs.<\/p>\nThe description in Job 40:15-24 fits closely the modern hippopotamus (see nlt<\/span>), except for the depiction of the tail. At present the hippopotamus is found only in the rivers of Africa, but there is fossil evidence that it has existed in the Holy Land, perhaps in the swamps of northern Galilee and the Jordan Valley.<\/p>\nThe hippopotamus has highly developed sense organs, placed in such a way that it can see, hear, and smell almost without being seen; its eyes, ears, and nostrils can reach above water while the rest of the animal lies submerged. It has a large mouth, large tusks, and a short, heavy throat. The strong legs are so short that the belly almost reaches the ground when the animal is on the land. The hippopotamus lives on plants and herbs growing in rivers, but if food is scarce there, it forages on land, usually at night. In spite of its heavy body it is surprisingly agile on land.<\/p>\nHorse<\/p>\nPrzewalski’s horse (Equus przewalskii,<\/em> an eastern race that roamed about Mongolia until modern firearms destroyed most of them after World War I) and the tarpan (a western race of southern Russia that became extinct in the Ukraine in 1851). The domesticated horse (Equus caballus)<\/em> seems to have been derived from the tarpan. The original site of domestication is believed to have been Turkestan, a region north of Afghanistan and India, now in Russia. The horse differs from the donkey in that it has shorter ears, a longer mane with a forelock, a long hairy tail, and a soft, sensitive muzzle.<\/p>\nHorses were used in war not only for riding but also for pulling the heavy, springless war chariots. Two kinds of horses were needed for these different purposes, and the Hebrews distinguished between chariot horses and cavalry horses.<\/p>\n\nThe Lord warned the early Israelites against unnecessarily amassing military strength in the form of horses and thereby following the oppressive tactics of the powerful Egyptians (Dt 17:14-16), but the demands of war caused both David and Solomon to import horses from Egypt into their kingdoms and to breed them. Solomon greatly increased the number of horses in the Jewish kingdom and maintained large stables at various cities (1 Kgs 10:26) such as the regional defense centers of Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer (1 Kgs 9:15-19). Ahab’s horses are mentioned in 1 Kings 18:5, and records of Shalmaneser III state that Ahab furnished 2,000 chariots to a coalition against Assyria.<\/p>\nIn early Israel, the horse was opposed as a symbol of pagan luxury and of dependence on physical power for defense (Dt 17:16; 1 Sm 8:11; Ps 20:7; Is 31:1). Horse trading, mentioned as early as Genesis 47:17, was carried on by Solomon between Egypt and the Syro-Hittite principalities (1 Kgs 10:28-29). Most biblical references to horses refer to their use in war, but horses were also used for transportation. Riding seems to have been less popular than the use of chariots. Cavalry units were not introduced until the 12th century BC<\/span> by the Medes. Joseph rode in Pharaoh’s second horse-drawn chariot (Gn 41:43), and Absalom made a display by riding a horse-drawn chariot (2 Sm 15:1). Naaman traveled by horse and chariot (2 Kgs 5:9). Later, horses were so common in Jerusalem that the royal palace had a special horse gate (2 Chr 23:15), and a gate of the city itself was known as the Horse Gate (Neh 3:28; Jer 31:40). Mordecai rode a royal horse of King Xerxes as a sign of honor (Est 6:8-11). Horses are often spoken of figuratively (Ps 32:9; “mare,” Sg 1:9; “stallions,” Jer 5:8; 12:5), especially in the context of judgment (Hb 3:8; Zec 1:8; 6:1-8; Rv 6:2-8; 9:17; 19:11-16).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Warfare; Travel.<\/p>\nHyena<\/p>\nStocky carnivore (Hyaena hyaena)<\/em> with coarse hair, an erect mane, and long hairs along the neck and back. Hyenas live in holes among rocks and banks. They are mainly nocturnal but are ordinarily neither noisy nor aggressive. Their cry, however, is a disagreeable, unearthly sound. Hyenas usually feed on carrion, crushing bones with their powerful jaws. If the carrion supply is inadequate, they will kill sheep, goats, or other small animals. When threatened, hyenas growl and erect their mane, but they rarely fight. They are massively built with forelegs longer than the hind legs.<\/p>\nKnown as scavengers in Africa, hyenas eat domestic refuse in the villages. In Palestine the striped hyena is a common predator, preferring rocky territory and even rock tombs. Since hyenas were notorious for raiding the graves of the dead, all Israelites who could afford it arranged for burial in tombs protected by massive stone doors. Absalom, King David’s son who was killed by Joab in the wild, was buried under a huge pile of stones to protect his corpse from molestation by hyenas (2 Sm 18:17).<\/p>\nJackal<\/p>\nCarnivore (Canis aureus)<\/em> smaller than the true wolf and with a shorter tail. It is similar to the fox but has a broader head, shorter ears, and longer legs. The fox is solitary; the jackal tends to be gregarious. Its tail can be drooping or erect, compared with the long horizontal tail of the fox. Jackals usually prowl at night, either singly, in pairs, or in packs through open savannah country. They eat small mammals, poultry, fruit, vegetables, and carrion. They spend their days in thickets and clumps of vegetation. Often they obtain scraps from kills by larger carnivores. Jackals can run at speeds of about 33 miles (53 kilometers) per hour.<\/p>\nThe jackal can reach a height of about 20 inches (51 centimeters), roughly the size of a German shepherd dog. Its back is pale yellow with dark, almost black, flanks. Its lips are black and its ears white on the inside. The howl of the jackal sounds like the crying of a child or the heartrending wail of the bereaved (Mi 1:8; cf. Jb 30:29). To other jackals the howl is merely an invitation calling the pack together for its nocturnal hunting.<\/p>\nOT references are chiefly to jackals prowling around ruined cities and wilderness areas (Neh 2:13; Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; 34:13; 35:7; Jer 9:11; 14:6; 49:33; 51:37; Lam 4:3; 5:18; Mal 1:3). Many such references are translated “dragon” in the kjv<\/span>, but “jackal” is more appropriate.<\/p>\nLeech<\/p>\nSegmented worm (class Hirundinea) up to five inches (12.7 centimeters) long with a flat body equipped with suction pads at each end. The mouth, located at the bottom of the front suction pad, has three teeth that the leech uses to pierce the skin of its host. The leech feeds on blood, and its glands secrete an anticoagulant to prevent the blood from clotting. The ordinary medicinal leech (Hirudo medicinalis) is abundant in springs and ponds from the Negev Desert to Galilee. It adheres to the bodies of human beings and animals that submerge themselves in water, injects its anticoagulant, and sucks their blood.<\/p>\nThe reference in Proverbs 30:15 is uncertain (see nlt<\/span>) but may be to the parasitic and greedy nature of the horse leech (genus Haemopis<\/em>). The small horse leech enters its host’s mouth and nostrils from water while the animal is drinking. A leech weighing one-half ounce (14.2 grams) has been known to gorge itself with two and a half ounces (71 grams) of concentrated blood and then to exist for 15 months with no more to eat.<\/p>\nLeopard<\/p>\nCalled Panthera pardus tulliana,<\/em> it is the most widespread of all the large wildcats. In rocky areas it lives in caves, but in forested regions it lives in thick vegetation. In OT times many lived in the vicinity of Mt Hermon (Sg 4:8).<\/p>\nThe leopard is somewhat smaller than the tiger, measuring up to 5 feet (1.5 meters) in length with a tail of about 30 inches (.8 meter). Its body is better proportioned than that of the tiger. The leopard takes its victim by surprise from a silent ambush, often concealing itself near villages or watering places and waiting for its prey, remaining in one spot for long spans of time. The leopard is swift on the ground (Hb 1:8), agile in trees, and very graceful in its movements. Its color is yellowish speckled with black spots (Jer 13:23). Daniel and John saw visions in which leopards were symbols of world powers (Dn 7:6; Rv 13:2).<\/p>\nThe leopard is a wary and cunning animal, formidable and ferocious (Jer 5:6; Hos 13:7; cf. Is 11:6). The leopard is dangerous not only to domestic animals but also to humans. With its natural camouflage it can hide on the forest floor, blending into the changing light and shadows. The Israelites were terrified of the leopard because it constantly ravaged their sheep and goats. Several biblical place names suggest that they were known for the leopards in their vicinity: Nimrah, Beth-nimrah, and Nimrim, a district northeast of the Dead Sea. It has survived in the Holy Land into the present century; a few leopards still exist in remote areas near Mt Tabor and Mt Carmel.<\/p>\nLeviathan<\/p>\nSea monster mentioned several times in the Bible (Pss 74:14; 104:26; Is 27:1, nlt<\/span>). It may refer to any of the larger marine animals such as large jellyfish, whales, or sharks, or to a large reptile like the crocodile. Some scholars think “Leviathan” may refer to animals now extinct, such as ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs (marine reptiles similar to dinosaurs). The scriptural term might also refer to certain dinosaurs that spent part of their lives half-submerged in shallow lakes and oceans. Other scholars believe that most of the references are to the crocodile.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\nLion<\/p>\nLarge, tawny-colored carnivore (Panthera leo)<\/em> that preys chiefly on hoofed mammals and charges by a series of leaps and bounds. Within historic times the lion ranged in Africa, Europe, and the Holy Land. In ancient times the territories of the African and Persian lions met in the Middle East. The lion of the Holy Land was the Asiatic or Persian lion (Panthera leo persica).<\/em><\/p>\nThe males have heavy manes that stop at the shoulders but cover much of the chest. The Persian lion cannot climb and is mainly nocturnal, returning to its lair or a thicket by day (Jer 4:7; 25:38; Na 2:11-12). This lion is about 5 feet (1.5 meters) long with a tasseled tail 30 inches (.8 meter) or so long; its shoulders may reach a height of 35 inches (.9 meter). It is one of the smallest of the lion breeds.<\/p>\nLions are usually found in pairs, though sometimes in larger numbers. A small group is known as a pride. They generally prefer open country but in Palestine evidently prowled the subtropical vegetation of the Jordan River valley. Lions, which usually hunt at dusk, kill smaller animals by a blow of the paw, larger ones by a bite in the throat. A lion does not remain in the same place for more than a few days. The animal is in its prime at about seven years of age, when it weighs from 400 to 600 pounds (181.6 to 272.4 kilograms).<\/p>\nThe lion does not characteristically attack humans, though like other great cats it may become a man-eater (1 Kgs 13:24-28; 20:36; 2 Kgs 17:25-26; Ps 57:4; Dn 6:7-27). Ordinarily, it attacks only out of great hunger or in self-defense. A very young lion that attacks humans can become dangerous if it develops a taste for human flesh. A very old lion, expelled from the pride because it can no longer keep up in the pursuit of antelope or gazelles, may choose humans as a relatively slow-moving prey.<\/p>\nA lion generally roars only on a full stomach—that is, after it has consumed its prey (Ps 22:13; Ez 22:25; Am 3:4). Nevertheless, its roaring arouses fear (Am 3:8; 1 Pt 5:8). The lion is a bold (2 Sm 17:10; Prv 28:1), destructive animal (Ps 7:2; Jer 2:30; Hos 5:14; Mi 5:8), and the enemy of flocks (Am 3:12).<\/p>\nLions were common in biblical times in all parts of the Holy Land. Hebrew has at least seven words for lion and young lion. The lion is referred to about 130 times in the OT—more than any other wild animal. Lions were evidently much less common in NT times. After gradually declining, they became extinct in Palestine shortly after AD<\/span> 1300. The lion was present in Mesopotamia, however, until the end of the 19th century.<\/p>\nLions played an important part in the political and religious symbolism of the Near East (1 Kgs 10:19-20). In Assyria and Babylonia the lion was regarded as a royal beast (Dn 7:4). Oriental monarchs maintained artificial lion pits as places of execution (Ez 19:1-9; Dn 6:7-16). Animals for these were captured in camouflaged nets or pits. To the Jews, the lion was the mightiest of beasts (Prv 30:29-31). Thus, it symbolized leadership (Gn 49:9-10; Nm 24:9) and hence eventually became a title for Christ (Rv 5:5). It was also the ensign of Judah’s tribe and was used by King Solomon in the decoration of his house and the temple.<\/p>\nLizard<\/p>\nReptiles of the suborder Lacertilia. Their skin is covered with scales. The lizard is a useful creature because it captures harmful insects and worms. Like other reptiles, it lays eggs with shells softer than those of a bird and with no clear division between the yolk and the white. Lizards are “cold-blooded” organisms without a temperature-maintenance mechanism; hence, they become inactive in cold weather.<\/p>\nLizards can survive in barren parched countryside. In the Near East they are encountered in great numbers in the Arabian Desert, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Judean wilderness. There may be as many as 44 different species of lizards in the Holy Land.<\/p>\nThe Dabb lizard (genus Uromastyx<\/em>), which attains a length of about 24 inches (61 centimeters), is found in the Negev Desert. It is omnivorous, an unusual trait since most lizards are insectivorous. It has a hard, rough skin, green with brown spots; a short, rounded head; and a powerful tail encircled with a row of strong spines that it uses as a weapon of defense.<\/p>\nLizards are listed as ceremonially unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:29-31). The fact that lizards crawl on their bellies made them unclean. Contact with a lizard’s carcass defiled a law-abiding Jew (Lv 11:32-36). The nlt<\/span> translates the “lizards” of Leviticus 11 as “great lizard,” “gecko,” “monitor lizard,” “sand lizard,” and “chameleon.” The monitor lizard is a large lizard that lives in the deserts of southern Palestine, Sinai, and Egypt. It is up to 55 inches (1.4 meters) long with a long snout and sharp teeth. Other translators and commentators render the original Hebrew in a wide variety of ways, including “tortoise,” “ferret,” “lizard,” “snail,” “mole,” and even “water hen.” The fact that most of the original Hebrew words occur only once in Scripture makes it very difficult to be certain about their appropriate translation.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Gecko (above).<\/p>\nLocust<\/p>\nAn insect of the family Acridiidae.<\/em> It is referred to by at least 12 different names in Scripture. The various Hebrew words may refer to different stages of its development from larva to adult or to the type of damage that it causes. Locusts are characterized by swarming and mass migration. In modern times they have caused extensive and disastrous destruction to vegetation. Grasshoppers do not swarm or migrate en masse, differentiating them from the true locusts.<\/p>\nThe OT mentions several different species of locusts. Leviticus 11:22 seems to refer to the slant-faced (bald) locust and also to the katydid, or long-horned grasshopper. The reference in Deuteronomy 28:42 may be to the mole cricket. In Joel 1:4 and 2:25 and in Nahum 3:16-17, successive stages of the insect’s development are described. The cutting locust (kjv<\/span> “palmerworm”) of Joel is probably the first instar (stage of development), the swarming locusts (kjv<\/span> “locust”) are middle stages, and the hopping locusts (kjv<\/span> “cankerworm”) later instars but not yet fully matured insects. In the adult stage, called destroying locusts (kjv<\/span> “caterpillar”), the color of the locust is reddish brown, which turns to yellow with a brownish network on the wings.<\/p>\nOnly three of the hundreds of varieties of locusts found in Bible lands are capable of multiplying into great swarms, and only the desert locust (Schistocerca gergaria)<\/em> can be considered widespread in all the Bible lands. The desert locust is native to the Sudan (Africa). It is a little over two inches (5 centimeters) long and has a wingspread of some five inches (12.7 centimeters). It shows two phases, a solitary phase and a gregarious phase, with a possible third phase known as transiens. There are differences in the immature and adult forms of the phases in color and physiology.<\/p>\nThe quantity and distribution of rains are important factors in the extent of swarming. Moist soil is needed for depositing the eggs and permitting them to develop. Each female deposits from one to six egg pods, containing 28 to 146 eggs each. The larvae emerge in 15 to 43 days.<\/p>\nIn the gregarious phase (from the second stage of metamorphosis onward), the locust is driven by a strong wandering instinct. Masses of them form a random procession of overflowing locust bodies that ignore any obstruction. They swarm over everything (Jl 2:4-9). The only regulator of their activities is temperature; they are immobilized by high or low temperatures. Taking to wing they may move 1,200 miles (1,930.8 kilometers) from their native home. They fly in compact formations large enough to blot out the light of the sun. Their movement seems to be controlled by hormones, but the direction is influenced by the wind. The swarms consume almost every plant in their path, sparing only the carob, sycamore, castor tree, and oleander bush.<\/p>\nA locust plague was one of the most severe evils to come upon the ancient world (Dt 28:38). Joel 2:1-11 describes a locust plague in graphic terms, using it as a symbol of God’s destroying judgment. Special days of prayer, fasting, and trumpet blowing were prescribed to remove locust plagues (1 Kgs 8:37-38; 2 Chr 6:28-29; Jl 2:12-17). Locusts symbolized powerful and merciless enemies that completely destroyed the earnings of human toil (Jgs 6:5; Is 33:4; Jer 46:23; 51:27; Na 3:15).<\/p>\nBedouins eat locusts raw, roasted, or boiled, preserving them by drying and threading. They are also crushed and ground, and the grist used in cooking or eaten with bread, sometimes mixed with honey and dates. Such was the diet of John the Baptist (Mk 1:6). The Greeks ground locusts in stone mortars to make flour of them.<\/p>\nThe ancients considered the two large hind legs, or jumping legs, as separate limbs and had a special name for them. Hence locusts were described as having four legs, a reference to the four smaller walking legs. “Going on all fours” thus referred to creeping or walking as opposed to jumping and did not mean that the unclean insects had only four legs in all. Because of its two hind jumping legs, the locust was exempted from the prohibition against unclean insects (Lv 11:20-23).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\nMole<\/p>\nRodent (Spalax ehrenbergi)<\/em> from six to nine inches (15 to 23 centimeters) long, which burrows in any area where the soil is suitable for digging; it should be called a mole rat. Common in the Holy Land, large numbers are found in the vicinity of Jerusalem. Isaiah 2:20 refers to the mole, as does Leviticus 11:29-30 (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe mole rat has no tail and is molelike in appearance, but neither true moles nor shrews have ever been found in the Holy Land. The mole rat’s teeth are strong and protruding like those of a squirrel. The neck is short and thick with a plump body shaped like a sausage. The short legs have broad paws with claws adapted for burrowing. The fur is soft, thick, and ashen gray. Its ears and almost sightless eyes, which are no larger than poppyseeds, are hidden in the fur. Folklore taught that touching a mole rat would result in blindness.<\/p>\nIn the wet winter season the mole rat builds breeding mounds resembling those of pocket gophers. It builds less complex resting mounds in the summer, although both have rather elaborate tunnel systems. The mole rat feeds on roots, bulbs, tubers, and various other subterranean plant parts, often doing extensive damage to agriculture.<\/p>\nMoth<\/p>\nInsect of the genus Tineola<\/em> that lays its eggs on wool or furs, its larvae feeding on those materials. The destructive qualities of moths are referred to in several biblical passages (Jb 13:28; Ps 39:11; Is 50:9; Hos 5:12; Mt 6:19-20; Lk 12:33; Jas 5:2). In Isaiah 51:8 “worm” (nlt<\/span>) refers specifically to the larva of the clothes moth. The moth symbolizes disintegration, decay, and weakening. It is only the larvae that do the damage. The adult is quite harmless and feeds mainly on the nectar of flowers. It is easily crushed (Jb 4:19). The clothes moth reproduces in May or June. It enters human dwellings in the evening. A week after the eggs are laid the larvae appear and immediately begin their work of destruction, eating anything within reach made of animal fibers.<\/p>\nThe moth’s destructive activity is done in secret without any sound and without any dramatic appearance, such as a swarm that blots out the sun. In an age when wealth was counted more in possessions than in money, and when among those possessions wool clothing was highly valued, moths could literally cause economic disaster; hence the words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 6:19-20).<\/p>\nThere are hundreds of species of moths other than the clothes moth in the Holy Land; they are harmless to leaves, flowers, fruit, trees, and seeds. As with the clothes moth, the larvae inflict the damage.<\/p>\nMouse<\/p>\nRodent of the family Muridae, especially genus Mus.<\/em> The mouse was regarded as unclean because, being short legged, it was considered one of the creeping creatures (Lv 11:29). Mice known as commensals live in dwellings and tend to have longer tails and to be darker in color than wild mice, which are active chiefly at night. Mice are good climbers and even good swimmers. Wild mice eat many kinds of vegetation, including seeds, fleshy roots, leaves, and stems. At times they store food.<\/p>\nThe Hebrew word for “mouse” (Lv 11:29; 1 Sm 6:4-5; Is 66:17) is probably a general term for various rats and mice. The root meaning of the Hebrew word “mouse” is “destruction of corn,” a reference to the damage mice do to field crops. At least 23 varieties of mouselike rodents are known in the Holy Land. They cause food spoilage, damage household articles, and transport the host fleas that spread typhus, spotted fever, and bubonic plague. Plague bacteria may have caused the tumors or swellings among the Philistines (1 Sm 6:5). Isaiah 66:17 refers to a pre-exilic Canaanite cultic practice in which mice were eaten; the reference may actually be to the hamster. A number of rodents are eaten by Arabs of the Near East; the gerbil is considered a special delicacy. See<\/em> Mole (above).<\/p>\nMule<\/p>\nHybrid offspring of a male ass and a female horse (Equus asinus mulus),<\/em> ordinarily sterile. The offspring of a female donkey and a stallion (male horse) is known as a hinny and is of little value because of its inferior size.<\/p>\nBecause crossbreeding was forbidden in the law (Lv 19:19), the Israelites procured mules from the Gentiles, perhaps from the Phoenicians, since Tyre (a Phoenician seaport in what is now southern Lebanon) imported horses and mules (Ez 27:14). Mules did not appear in Israel until David’s reign (2 Sm 13:29), possibly because of the rarity of horses among the Hebrews. Mules were used chiefly by members of the royal court and by other nobles. King David rode on a mule, and Solomon rode to his inaugaration on King David’s mule (1 Kgs 1:33). Absalom met his death riding on a mule (2 Sm 18:9). Mules were less common than horses, camels, and asses in the postexilic community (Ezr 2:66). In antiquity Asia Minor was especially noted for breeding fine mules.<\/p>\nMules have long enjoyed a reputation for obstinacy, but that trait is not mentioned in the Bible. The mule is prized for riding and for carrying heavy burdens, especially in warm mountainous regions. They are sure-footed and thrive best in hot, dry climates. The mule has the frugality, endurance, and steady gait of an ass along with the size, strength, swiftness, and courage of a horse. Mules are almost never sick. They live longer than horses. They can carry a load of up to 300 pounds (136 kilograms) as far as 30 miles (48.3 kilometers) a day.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\nPig<\/p>\nMost properly, newborn swine. “Swine” is technically the better name for the species, but it is rarely used in common speech today. The domestic pigs of the Middle East derived from the wild pig (Sus scrofa).<\/em> The pig is the most prolific and abundant supplier of meat and fat for food. A thick layer of fat just under the skin is especially pronounced in domestic breeds. Pigs cannot be driven, so they are of value only to the settled farmer. The Hebrews were originally a nomadic people; therefore, they had little use for an animal closely associated with settled life. An Egyptian prince of about 1500 BC<\/span>, however, is recorded as owning a herd of 1,500 swine.<\/p>\nThe pig is clumsily built, yet lively and able to move with agility and speed. The most conspicuous characteristic of the pig is a truncated, mobile snout terminating in a disc-shaped surface on which the nostrils are located. Most pigs have large tusks in both jaws which grow continuously in life. The tusks of the upper jaw are unique in that they curve upward instead of pointing downward as in most animals. The excrement of a pig has an almost unbearable odor, which clings not only to the pig itself but also to swineherds, who can be identified a long way off.<\/p>\nPigs were never raised in the Holy Land by Jews. The great herd into which Jesus drove the unclean spirits was encountered in the land of the Gadarenes, a non-Jewish area east of the Jordan. The Gadarene demons took refuge in a herd of pigs feeding on a bluff overlooking the Sea of Galilee (Mt 8:28-32).<\/p>\nWild pigs were found in the Holy Land as in many countries today. Psalm 80:13 refers to the destructiveness of a wild boar (the male, or hog) attacking growing crops. A party of wild boars can destroy an entire vineyard or a field of crops in a single night. They devour, trample, and ravage everything within reach.<\/p>\nBoar hunts were common in ancient Mesopotamia. Wild boars do not attack unless molested, but they are dangerous when aroused. They travel in bands of from 6 to 50 and are most active in the evening and early morning hours. The body is covered with stiff bristles and usually some finer hair, but the body covering is often quite scanty. Wild pigs are mainly vegetarian, feeding on roots, nuts, grains, and plant stems. Wild boars were particularly abundant in the mountainous regions of Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon, in the Jordan River valley, and in wooded sections such as Mt Tabor.<\/p>\nStrict Jews would not even mention swine by name but would always substitute the term “the abomination.” Israelites considered themselves polluted if they were even touched by a swine’s bristle. To the Jews, the pig symbolized filth and ugliness. Pigs will eat fecal material, vermin, rodents, carrion, and the like (2 Pt 2:22). Proverbs 11:22 refers to the incongruity of a golden ring in the nose of an animal showing such characteristics. A similar metaphor occurs in Jesus’ statement about casting pearls before swine (Mt 7:6). The prodigal son’s degeneration was shown by his being forced in his poverty to feed pigs and eat their food (Lk 15:15-16).<\/p>\nEating the flesh of pigs was forbidden to the Jews (Lv 11:7; Dt 14:8). The Canaanites in the Holy Land killed and ate pigs freely. In intertestamental times Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), a Syrian king whose territories included Israel, used the pig to “Hellenize” the Jews. He first tested their loyalty to the Jewish faith by requiring the consumption of pork, considered a delicacy by the Greeks (2 Macc 6:18). The act of desecration that drove the Jews to rebellion, however, was the sprinkling of pig blood on the temple altar in a sacrifice to Zeus (1 Macc 1:47).<\/p>\nPigs were frequently used in pagan worship (Is 65:4; 66:3, 17), which may account for their being forbidden to the Jews as food. Evidence in the Holy Land shows that pigs were sacrificed long before Hellenistic times. Pig bones were found in a grotto below the rock-cut place of sacrifice at Gezer. A similar underground chamber with vessels containing piglet bones at Tirzah dates to the middle Bronze Age (about 2000 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nAlabaster fragments of a statuette of a pig ready to be sacrificed have been unearthed. Swine were sacrificed to Aphrodite (Venus) in Greece and Asia Minor. In addition, pigs were sacrificed in connection with oaths and treaties; in the Iliad,<\/em> Agamemnon sacrificed a boar to Zeus and Helios. So it is not surprising that among the Jews the pig became a symbol of filthiness and paganism.<\/p>\nIt is possible that eating pork was forbidden primarily because the pig may carry many worm parasites such as trichina, though that is also true of some “clean” animals. Another reason for forbidding their consumption may have been that pigs eat carrion. Some people are allergic to pork in hot weather—another suggested reason behind the Jewish taboo. The same taboo exists among the Muslims and existed in certain social strata in Egypt.<\/p>\nPorcupine<\/p>\nRodent, Hystrix cristata,<\/em> which lives in forested areas, rocky hills, ravines, and valleys. The porcupine is still found in the Holy Land today. It has long quills that can be raised to give the appearance of a crest. It is almost entirely nocturnal. It burrows by day into a natural cavity or crevice. The Old World porcupine rarely climbed trees, although the New World porcupine frequently does. A porcupine may weigh as much as 60 pounds (27.2 kilograms). It eats fruit, bark, roots, and other vegetation, and carrion as well. Although its flesh is edible, the porcupine was not classed among the clean animals for the Israelites. The reference in Isaiah 34:11 (rsv<\/span>) is probably to the porcupine, as is Isaiah 14:23 in the nlt<\/span>. See<\/em> Hedgehog.<\/p>\nScorpion<\/p>\nArthropod of the same group as spiders (arachnids). A dozen species of scorpions (order Scorpionida) are found in the Holy Land, but 90 percent of the scorpions are yellow scorpions, usually three to five inches (7.6 to 12.7 centimeters) long. The rock scorpion, also common to the Holy Land, is as thick as a man’s finger and from five to seven inches (12.7 to 17.8 centimeters) in length. Scorpions are slow, nocturnal invertebrates that rest beneath stones by day and prey on insects and other arachnids by night. At the end of its long tail the scorpion carries a poisonous sting that is fatal to most prey and extremely painful to humans (Rv 9:3, 5, 10; cf. 1 Kgs 12:11, 14). Scorpions symbolize Ezekiel’s evil countrymen (Ez 2:6) and the demonic forces of Satan (Lk 10:19). The scorpion is referred to as frequenting the Sinai Desert (Dt 8:15).<\/p>\nA scorpion has from six to eight eyes. It has eight legs like a spider and two lobsterlike claws with which it catches and holds its prey. It feeds particularly on locusts and beetles. In many species the female scorpion eats the male after mating. Scorpions lay eggs that hatch very shortly after laying. Scorpions prefer warmer climates, and because of their desire for warmth, enter houses, especially at night, hiding in beds, blankets, footwear, and clothing.<\/p>\nSheep<\/p>\nDomestic animal, Ovis orientalis,<\/em> referred to directly or by some term such as ewe, lamb, ram, or by some fact concerning them over 700 times in Scripture.<\/p>\nSheep represented the chief wealth and total livelihood of pastoral peoples, providing food to eat, milk to drink, wool for the making of cloth, and hides and bones for other uses. In addition, the sheep was a medium of exchange and a sacrificial animal. The number of sheep raised in ancient times was prodigious. Mesha, king of Moab, paid a tribute annually of 100,000 lambs and the wool of 100,000 rams (2 Kgs 3:4). The Israelites took 250,000 sheep from the Hagrites (1 Chr 5:21).<\/p>\nSheep shearing was often done for festivals (2 Sm 13:23). The sheep was held down on its side and its legs were tied together; then it lay docilely while its wool was clipped (Is 53:7). Sheep reserved for burnt offerings were not shorn; nothing could be held back from a sacrifice to the Lord.<\/p>\nWool had to be processed before it could be used for clothing. First it was washed, sometimes while still on the sheep, then carded and perhaps weighed for the market. The spinning of wool was regarded as a woman’s work (Prv 31:19), but weaving the spun thread into cloth on a loom was primarily a man’s occupation.<\/p>\nThe Bible reports that Abel kept sheep (Gn 4:2). The first sheep to be domesticated was probably the argali (Ovis ammon),<\/em> a variety of the urial (Ovis vignei),<\/em> a mountainous species still existing in Turkestan and Mongolia. Five breeds had reached Mesopotamia by 2000 BC<\/span>; all were of the urial stock.<\/p>\nThe sheep known in Israel was the broad-tailed sheep (Ovis orientalis vignei<\/em> or laticaudata),<\/em> of which the tail weighs from 10 to 15 pounds (4.5 to 6.8 kilograms) and has always been considered a delicacy. Thus the Lord asked for this choice part as a sacrifice (Ex 29:22-25).<\/p>\nOnly the ram of the broad-tailed sheep has horns, but in other varieties of sheep in the Holy Land the ewe also has horns. The horns, two to three inches (5 to 8 centimeters) in diameter, can be potent weapons. Rams’ horns could be used as trumpets (Jos 6:4) or as oil containers (1 Sm 16:1).<\/p>\nAlthough the sheep is very similar to the goat, it is differentiated by a lower forehead, its angulated spiral horns marked with transverse wrinkles and curved slightly outward, its covering of wool, and its lack of a “goatee.” Most sheep are white (Ps 147:16; Is 1:18; Dn 7:9; Rv 1:14).<\/p>\nThe flesh of sheep was a luxury in the biblical culture. King Solomon required a daily provision of 100 sheep for his table (1 Kgs 4:23), but the common people ate lamb or mutton only on festive occasions. A young ram was usually chosen because the ewes were more important to the future prospects of the herd. The meat was boiled in large caldrons. The milk of the sheep is extremely rich; in biblical times it was usually allowed to curdle before drinking. Possibly some Israelites kept lambs in their houses as pets (2 Sm 12:3-4).<\/p>\nTo protect the flock at night against predatory attacks, the shepherd tried to provide a fold. In meadows near villages, folds were built and watchmen were hired to relieve the shepherds. The shepherds of the nativity story were out in the field (Lk 2:8); they had no fold but probably had set up a tent for shelter, consisting simply of goat-hair blankets spread across sapling supports. The scarcity of springs in the Holy Land made the watering of the flock a crucial problem for the shepherd (Gn 13:8-11).<\/p>\nWild mountain sheep, varieties of Ovis orientalis,<\/em> are known in the Mediterranean area (Dt 14:5). The Deuteronomy passage (kjv<\/span> “chamois”) might also refer to Ovis traelaphus,<\/em> a sheep about five feet high (1.5 meters) with long, curved horns. Another possibility is the Barbary sheep that lives in small flocks in rugged mountain areas in Barbary, Egypt, and Mt Sinai. The true chamois is unknown in Palestine.<\/p>\nThe sheep is also used figuratively in Scripture. The ram represented great strength and fittingly symbolized Medo-Persia in Daniel’s vision (Dn 8:3). It is the nature of sheep to be gentle and submissive (Is 53:7; Jer 11:19), defenseless (Mi 5:8; Mt 10:16), and in constant need of guidance and care (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36). Such qualities are regarded as desirable in the lives of believers in Christ; hence the many figurative references to sheep in the NT and to Jesus as shepherd (Mk 6:34; Jn 10:1-30; Rom 8:35-37; Heb 13:20-21; 1 Pt 2:25). The resurrected Christ told the apostle Peter to “feed my lambs” and “tend my sheep” (Jn 21:15-17).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\nSnail<\/p>\nInvertebrate gastropods (mollusks). Land snails are very numerous in the Near East. Some freshwater forms serve as hosts for the schistosome worm, the fluke parasite causing the dread disease bilharzia (schistosomiasis).<\/p>\nPurple dyes of all shades were highly valued in the ancient world. A royal purple dye was obtained from secretions of a sea snail (Murex trunculus<\/em> and Murex brandaris).<\/em> Evidently, that process was developed by Phoenicians, Egyptians, and Assyrians as early as 1500 BC<\/span>. The “purple” fishermen had their own guild during the time of the Roman Empire. The snails were harvested during the fall and winter seasons; in the spring, when egg laying took place, little dye was available. The snails tended to remain concealed in the summer. They inhabited the waters off Crete and Phoenicia. Tyrian purple, produced in the Phoenician city of Tyre, the center of the purple-dye industry, was obtained by a double dyeing. Large deposits of murex shells from dyeing operations have been found along the Mediterranean shoreline. The Israelites had to import purple goods (Ez 27:16). Lydia was a “seller of purple” or of cloth so dyed (Acts 16:14). Purple was a sign of distinction, royalty, and wealth (cf. Ex 25:4; 28:5-6, 15; Nm 15:38; 2 Chr 2:7; Est 8:15; Prv 31:22; Sg 3:10; Ez 27:7; Dn 5:7).<\/p>\nExodus 30:34-35 refers to “onycha,” which was an important ingredient of incense. Onycha is the horny, clawlike operculum (the plate that closes off the opening of its shell when a snail is retracted) of a Near Eastern member of the molluskan family Strombidae. The operculum is sometimes used for offense or locomotion as well as for defense. When burned, the operculum gives off a sharp, strong scent, and when mixed with more fragrant but less powerful substances is even more potent. The name “onycha” is derived from a Greek word (onyx)<\/em> for a fingernail or a claw.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>\nSnake<\/p>\nVarious species of snake, suborder Ophidia (Serpentes). In the Bible nine Hebrew words and four Greek ones refer to snakes. The most common Hebrew word is onomatopoeic—that is, it is an imitation of a snake hissing or of the sound it produces as it scrapes its scales along the ground (cf. Jer 46:22). Many types of snakes lay eggs (Is 59:5), although some retain the eggs in the body until ready to hatch.<\/p>\nSnakes are among the most widespread reptiles and are found on all continents except Antarctica; they decrease in numbers and species toward the poles but increase as one approaches the equator. Thirty-three species of snakes are known in Palestine and neighboring countries, 20 of which are poisonous. Two dangerous characteristics of the snake noted by biblical writers are its inconspicuous way of moving and the ease with which it hides itself.<\/p>\nMany snakes are able to swallow animals several times their own diameter because of their unusually flexible jaw mechanism. They lack not only legs but also movable eyelids. Snakes periodically shed their skins. The tongue is actually a hearing apparatus sensitive to airborne vibrations and probably to heat waves.<\/p>\nThe venom of poisonous species is a clear, thin secretion, transmitted to the victim’s bloodstream by means of fangs. Two types of venom are known: that of the vipers, which affects respiration and disintegrates red blood cells, and that of the cobras, which paralyzes the nervous system.<\/p>\nThe “asp” referred to in the Bible is probably the cobra; the “adder” is the viper. The “cockatrice” (kjv<\/span>) is probably the adder. Serpents were associated with worship in Canaanite religion and symbolized evil deities among many other peoples. Steles (upright stones bearing inscriptions) have been unearthed at several sites in the Holy Land and Syria depicting a god or worshiper with a snake winding about the legs or body. Because the Israelites were burning incense in pagan worship of Moses’ bronze serpent (Nm 21:8-9), King Hezekiah destroyed it in his religious reform (2 Kgs 18:4).<\/p>\nAlthough snakes have been an object of veneration in some religions, in the Judeo-Christian tradition snakes represent evil and, more specifically, the devil. That association began in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:1-15) and is also found in the book of Revelation (12:9; 20:2-3).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Adder (above); Asp (above).<\/p>\nSpider<\/p>\nAnimal of the order Araneida. Between 600 and 700 different species inhabit the Holy Land. Spiders are different from insects in that, like scorpions, they have four pairs of legs instead of three. Spiders are equipped with poison glands—the effectiveness varying from species to species. A few can kill only insects, but others can also kill birds and mice.<\/p>\nMost spiders have a pair of spinnerets attached to silk glands on the underside of the abdomen; from them a web is extruded. In the Bible the spider’s web is referred to as a symbol of frailty and insecurity (Jb 8:14; Is 59:5-6).<\/p>\nSponge<\/p>\nSimple marine animals, phylum Porifera. The term “sponge” also refers to those animals’ skeletal remains. The sponge has a porous body composed of tubules and cells.<\/p>\nSponge fishing was well known in the Mediterranean area in ancient times. It was practiced particularly along the Anatolian and Syrian coasts. Sponges were harvested by divers. The use of sponges in absorbing liquids is referred to in the Bible (Mt 27:48; Mk 15:36).<\/p>\nUnicorn<\/p>\nSee<\/em> Wild Ox (below).<\/p>\nWasp<\/p>\nInsects of the family Vespidae. Hornets are social wasps that build large aerial apartment houses in which 1,000 or more individuals may live. In the Bible the hornet is used as a metaphor for God’s use of military forces (Ex 23:28; Dt 7:20; Jos 24:12).<\/p>\nWhale<\/p>\nLargest of all living creatures, including those that have become extinct. Whales are air-breathing mammals of the order Cetacea.<\/p>\nTwo varieties of whales visit the shores of the Holy Land at times. The finback whale (Balaenoptera physalus)<\/em> weighs about 200 tons (181 metric tons) and lives mainly in the Arctic region but sometimes passes through the Straits of Gibraltar to reach the eastern Mediterranean Sea. It feeds on small marine organisms that it strains through its whale bone; it does not have teeth. The finback whale’s esophagus is narrow.<\/p>\nThe sperm whale (Physeter catodon),<\/em> about 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, has a curiously shaped head that looks like a battering ram. The teeth in the lower jaw of the male sperm whale are about seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long. It feeds on big fish, even on sharks. It has a large throat opening.<\/p>\nWhales are referred to in Genesis 1:21 and Job 7:12 (kjv<\/span> only). The “great fish” of Jonah 2:1 need not have been a whale but could have been a large shark, such as the whale shark (Rhineodon),<\/em> which grows 70 feet (21.3 meters) long and lacks the terrible teeth of other sharks. Whatever the actual marine organism, Jonah’s deliverance was miraculous. The Greek word for “whale” is sometimes used as a general term for “sea monster” or huge fish and may be used in that sense in Matthew 12:40.<\/p>\nWild Ox<\/p>\nLarge, fierce, fleet, intractable animal (Bos primigenius).<\/em> It had a long, lean rump with a straight back and a long, narrow head. The animal described in Job 39:9-12 is clearly the wild ox. The two horns (Dt 33:17), its outstanding characteristic, were straight and as long as the head (Nm 23:22; 24:8; Ps 22:21). Kings often symbolized their dominion by wearing a helmet with two wild ox horns (cf. Pss 92:10; 132:17-18). The horns were often used as drinking vessels by the Israelites; some were large enough to hold four gallons (15 liters).<\/p>\nHunting the wild ox was a favorite sport of Assyrian kings. Tiglath-pileser I hunted it in the Lebanon Mountains about 1100 BC<\/span> (cf. Ps 29:6). At one time the animal referred to in Job 39:9-12 was thought to be the oryx or antelope because of the similarity between the Hebrew word in Job and the Arabian name for oryx. The translators of the kjv<\/span> called the wild ox a “unicorn” because of representations found on Babylonian mosaics and Egyptian drawings. Those representations showed it in strict profile, showing only one horn—hence, “unicorn.” Jerome’s Vulgate, a Latin Bible translation (fourth century AD<\/span>) and Martin Luther’s German version translated it similarly.<\/p>\nWolf<\/p>\nLarge doglike mammal (Canis lupus)<\/em> that travels in bands of up to 30 animals. From the nose to the rump, the wolf measures about 3 feet (.9 meter); its drooping tail is about 18 inches (.5 meter) long. It looks much like a skinny German shepherd dog. The grayish yellow pelt is coarse and short haired.<\/p>\nWolves hunt singly or in relays, usually at night (Jer 5:6). Wolves have acute hearing and sight but rely chiefly on scent and usually catch their prey in a swift, open chase. The wolf has a reputation for boldness, fierceness, and voracity (Gn 49:27; Hb 1:8). It commonly kills more than it can eat or drag away and thus is known for its greediness.<\/p>\nThe wolf is a restless animal, always on the move; hunger drives it from one place to another in constant search of new hunting grounds. During spring and fall, wolves usually roam singly or in pairs, whereas in summer they may travel in family groups. In winter, several such groups may join to form a large pack. Wolves are intelligent, social creatures, faithful to their own kind. They mate for life. Individually, the wolf is a rather timid animal; it would much rather avoid human beings. But collectively wolves can be among the most dangerous animals alive.<\/p>\nIn Egypt, Rome, and Greece the wolf was considered sacred. Wolves were well known in the Holy Land and are still found there and also in many places in Asia Minor. Shepherds continually battled with wolves that plundered their flocks (Jn 10:12).<\/p>\nThe Bible refers to wolves in a literal sense in only three places (Is 11:6; 65:25; Jn 10:12), all other references being figurative. Usually the wolf is a symbol of enemies or the wicked (e.g., Ez 22:27; Zep 3:3; Acts 20:29). Both the wolf’s courage and its cruelty were probably in the mind of the patriarch Jacob when he predicted the fate of Benjamin’s tribe (Gn 49:27).<\/p>\nWorm<\/p>\nActually insect larvae in most biblical references, usually maggots, the larvae of flies (see Fly, above). For example, maggots are evidently referred to in accounts of worms feeding on spoiled manna (Ex 16:19-20), corpses (Jb 21:26; Is 14:11), or open wounds (Jb 7:5). Mark 9:48 refers to a maggot that eats dead flesh. In Acts 12:23 a fatal, worm-induced abdominal disease of King Herod is mentioned. In other cases, the reference is to the larvae of other insects (Is 51:8). In Deuteronomy 28:39 and Jonah 4:7 the vine weevil (Cochylis ambiguella)<\/em> is probably referred to; it destroys vines by boring into their stems. Comparing a man to a worm is a metaphor for abasement (Jb 25:6; Ps 22:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANIMALS In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals ...","summary_en":"ANIMALS In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16701,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Horse Gate","title_en":"Horse Gate","content_ro":"<h3>HORSE GATE<\/h3>\nGate near the palace in Jerusalem (Jer 31:40), in the southeast part of the city wall. Here Queen Athaliah was put to death (2 Kgs 11:16; 2 Chr 23:15). The gate was restored under Nehemiah (Neh 3:28).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jerusalem.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HORSE GATE<\/h3>\nGate near the palace in Jerusalem (Jer 31:40), in the southeast part of the city wall. Here Queen Athaliah was put to death (2 Kgs 11:16; 2 Chr 23:15). The gate was restored under Nehemiah (Neh 3:28).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jerusalem.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HORSE GATE Gate near the palace in Jerusalem (Jer 31:40), in the southeast part of the city wall. Here Queen Athaliah was put to death (2 Kgs 11:16; 2 Chr 23:15). The gate was restored under Nehemiah (Neh 3:28). See also Jerusalem.","summary_en":"HORSE GATE Gate near the palace in Jerusalem (Jer 31:40), in the southeast part of the city wall. Here Queen Athaliah was put to death (2 Kgs 11:16; 2 Chr 23:15). The gate was restored under Nehemiah (Neh 3:28). See also Jerusalem.","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52536,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:40","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:40","content_ro":"31:40<\/strong> Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city<\/em>,<\/em> present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump<\/em> were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley<\/em> was on the east<\/em> (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate<\/em> on the eastern wall is unknown.<\/p>","content_en":"31:40<\/strong> Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city<\/em>,<\/em> present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump<\/em> were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley<\/em> was on the east<\/em> (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate<\/em> on the eastern wall is unknown.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:40 Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city, present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley was on the east (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate on the eastern wall is unknown.","summary_en":"31:40 Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city, present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley was on the east (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate on the eastern wall is unknown.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80162,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:40","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:40","content_ro":"31:40<\/strong> Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city<\/em>,<\/em> present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump<\/em> were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley<\/em> was on the east<\/em> (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate<\/em> on the eastern wall is unknown.<\/p>","content_en":"31:40<\/strong> Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city<\/em>,<\/em> present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump<\/em> were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley<\/em> was on the east<\/em> (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate<\/em> on the eastern wall is unknown.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:40 Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city, present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley was on the east (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate on the eastern wall is unknown.","summary_en":"31:40 Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city, present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley was on the east (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate on the eastern wall is unknown.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":107788,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:40","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:40","content_ro":"31:40<\/strong> Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city<\/em>,<\/em> present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump<\/em> were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley<\/em> was on the east<\/em> (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate<\/em> on the eastern wall is unknown.<\/p>","content_en":"31:40<\/strong> Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city<\/em>,<\/em> present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump<\/em> were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley<\/em> was on the east<\/em> (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate<\/em> on the eastern wall is unknown.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:40 Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city, present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley was on the east (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate on the eastern wall is unknown.","summary_en":"31:40 Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city, present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley was on the east (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate on the eastern wall is unknown.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135414,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ieremia 31:40","title_en":"Study Note: Ieremia 31:40","content_ro":"31:40<\/strong> Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city<\/em>,<\/em> present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump<\/em> were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley<\/em> was on the east<\/em> (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate<\/em> on the eastern wall is unknown.<\/p>","content_en":"31:40<\/strong> Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city<\/em>,<\/em> present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump<\/em> were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley<\/em> was on the east<\/em> (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate<\/em> on the eastern wall is unknown.<\/p>","summary_ro":"31:40 Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city, present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley was on the east (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate on the eastern wall is unknown.","summary_en":"31:40 Jerusalem will be an eternal holy . . . city, present in the heavenly realm and on the new earth (Rev 21–22). • The graveyard and ash dump were in the valley of Ben-Hinnom (see study note on Jer 7:30-34) on the south side of the city, and the Kidron Valley was on the east (2 Kgs 23:4-6). • The exact location of the Horse Gate on the eastern wall is unknown.","source":"StudyNotes.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"}}

Ieremia 31

Citește Biblia

Ieremia 31

Niciun rezultat

Redare audio

Bine ai venit! 👋