Citește Biblia

{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":6135,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cedron*","title_en":"Cedron*","content_ro":"<h3>CEDRON*<\/h3>\n<p>KJV name for Kidron, the river valley between Jerusalem and the Mt of Olives, in John 18:1. <em>See<\/em> Kidron.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CEDRON*<\/h3>\n<p>KJV name for Kidron, the river valley between Jerusalem and the Mt of Olives, in John 18:1. <em>See<\/em> Kidron.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CEDRON* KJV name for Kidron, the river valley between Jerusalem and the Mt of Olives, in John 18:1. See Kidron.","summary_en":"CEDRON* KJV name for Kidron, the river valley between Jerusalem and the Mt of Olives, in John 18:1. See Kidron.","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13718,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gethsemane","title_en":"Gethsemane","content_ro":"<h3>GETHSEMANE<\/h3>\n<p>Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53).<\/p>\n<p>The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclosed piece of ground. It may be that the grove was privately owned and that Jesus and his disciples had special permission to enter.<\/p>\n<p>Though the Gospels of Luke and John do not mention the word Gethsemane, they both record Jesus’ agony before his betrayal. Luke says the location was on the “Mount of Olives” (Lk 22:39). John describes the area as “across the Kidron Valley” (Jn 18:1); John’s is the only Gospel to call the spot a garden. From those accounts it is also evident that Jesus and his disciples gathered in Gethsemane often for fellowship and prayer (Lk 22:39; Jn 18:2). The Gospel narratives indicate that the garden was large enough for the group to separate into different parts of it.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GETHSEMANE<\/h3>\n<p>Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53).<\/p>\n<p>The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclosed piece of ground. It may be that the grove was privately owned and that Jesus and his disciples had special permission to enter.<\/p>\n<p>Though the Gospels of Luke and John do not mention the word Gethsemane, they both record Jesus’ agony before his betrayal. Luke says the location was on the “Mount of Olives” (Lk 22:39). John describes the area as “across the Kidron Valley” (Jn 18:1); John’s is the only Gospel to call the spot a garden. From those accounts it is also evident that Jesus and his disciples gathered in Gethsemane often for fellowship and prayer (Lk 22:39; Jn 18:2). The Gospel narratives indicate that the garden was large enough for the group to separate into different parts of it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GETHSEMANE Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53). The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclo...","summary_en":"GETHSEMANE Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53). The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclo...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20177,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21691,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kidron","title_en":"Kidron","content_ro":"<h3>KIDRON<\/h3>\n<p>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.<\/p>\n<p>The 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>\n<p>The term “brook” found in John 18:1 (<span>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>\n<p>The 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\n<p>Since the fourth century <span>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>\n<p>The 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 (<em>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>\n<p>The 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>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jerusalem.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KIDRON<\/h3>\n<p>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.<\/p>\n<p>The 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>\n<p>The term “brook” found in John 18:1 (<span>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>\n<p>The 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\n<p>Since the fourth century <span>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>\n<p>The 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 (<em>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>\n<p>The 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>\n<p><em>See 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":28937,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Passion*","title_en":"Passion*","content_ro":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","summary_en":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31418,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Procurator*","title_en":"Procurator*","content_ro":"<h3>PROCURATOR*<\/h3>\n<p>Financial officer of Rome (<span>nlt<\/span> “governor”), usually from the equestrian rank, whose responsibilities included the supervision and collection of imperial revenues in an assigned province. In Judea and other lesser provinces of the Roman Empire, the procurator acted at times as the governor of that region. He not only managed financial affairs but also exercised judicial and military authority, and he was primarily responsible for keeping peace in his jurisdiction. The NT mentions three Roman procurators: Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36; Mt 27; Jn 18–19), Antonius Felix (<span>AD<\/span> 52–59; Acts 23:24–25:14), and Porcius Festus (<span>AD<\/span> 59–62; Acts 24:27–26:32). These administrators were held accountable and subordinate to the governor of Syria.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Felix, Antonius; Festus, Porcius; Pilate, Pontius.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROCURATOR*<\/h3>\n<p>Financial officer of Rome (<span>nlt<\/span> “governor”), usually from the equestrian rank, whose responsibilities included the supervision and collection of imperial revenues in an assigned province. In Judea and other lesser provinces of the Roman Empire, the procurator acted at times as the governor of that region. He not only managed financial affairs but also exercised judicial and military authority, and he was primarily responsible for keeping peace in his jurisdiction. The NT mentions three Roman procurators: Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36; Mt 27; Jn 18–19), Antonius Felix (<span>AD<\/span> 52–59; Acts 23:24–25:14), and Porcius Festus (<span>AD<\/span> 59–62; Acts 24:27–26:32). These administrators were held accountable and subordinate to the governor of Syria.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Felix, Antonius; Festus, Porcius; Pilate, Pontius.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROCURATOR* Financial officer of Rome (nlt “governor”), usually from the equestrian rank, whose responsibilities included the supervision and collection of imperial revenues in an assigned province. In Judea and other lesser provinces of the Roman Empire, the procurator acted at times as the governor of that region. He not only managed financial affairs but also exercised judicial and military authority, and he was primarily responsible for keeping peace in his jurisdiction. The NT mentions t...","summary_en":"PROCURATOR* Financial officer of Rome (nlt “governor”), usually from the equestrian rank, whose responsibilities included the supervision and collection of imperial revenues in an assigned province. In Judea and other lesser provinces of the Roman Empire, the procurator acted at times as the governor of that region. He not only managed financial affairs but also exercised judicial and military authority, and he was primarily responsible for keeping peace in his jurisdiction. The NT mentions t...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56704,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:1-40<\/strong> After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:1-40<\/strong> After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1-40 After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.","summary_en":"18:1-40 After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56705,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:1-2<\/strong> <em>Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley<\/em><em>,<\/em> a dry river valley (a <em>wadi<\/em> ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was <em>a grove of olive trees<\/em> that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (<em>gath shemaney<\/em> means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:1-2<\/strong> <em>Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley<\/em><em>,<\/em> a dry river valley (a <em>wadi<\/em> ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was <em>a grove of olive trees<\/em> that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (<em>gath shemaney<\/em> means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1-2 Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley, a dry river valley (a wadi ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was a grove of olive trees that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (gath shemaney means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).","summary_en":"18:1-2 Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley, a dry river valley (a wadi ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was a grove of olive trees that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (gath shemaney means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84330,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:1-40<\/strong> After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:1-40<\/strong> After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1-40 After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.","summary_en":"18:1-40 After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84331,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:1-2<\/strong> <em>Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley<\/em><em>,<\/em> a dry river valley (a <em>wadi<\/em> ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was <em>a grove of olive trees<\/em> that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (<em>gath shemaney<\/em> means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:1-2<\/strong> <em>Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley<\/em><em>,<\/em> a dry river valley (a <em>wadi<\/em> ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was <em>a grove of olive trees<\/em> that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (<em>gath shemaney<\/em> means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1-2 Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley, a dry river valley (a wadi ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was a grove of olive trees that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (gath shemaney means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).","summary_en":"18:1-2 Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley, a dry river valley (a wadi ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was a grove of olive trees that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (gath shemaney means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111956,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:1-40<\/strong> After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:1-40<\/strong> After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1-40 After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.","summary_en":"18:1-40 After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111957,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:1-2<\/strong> <em>Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley<\/em><em>,<\/em> a dry river valley (a <em>wadi<\/em> ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was <em>a grove of olive trees<\/em> that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (<em>gath shemaney<\/em> means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:1-2<\/strong> <em>Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley<\/em><em>,<\/em> a dry river valley (a <em>wadi<\/em> ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was <em>a grove of olive trees<\/em> that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (<em>gath shemaney<\/em> means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1-2 Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley, a dry river valley (a wadi ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was a grove of olive trees that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (gath shemaney means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).","summary_en":"18:1-2 Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley, a dry river valley (a wadi ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was a grove of olive trees that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (gath shemaney means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139582,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:1-40<\/strong> After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:1-40<\/strong> After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1-40 After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.","summary_en":"18:1-40 After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139583,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:1-2<\/strong> <em>Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley<\/em><em>,<\/em> a dry river valley (a <em>wadi<\/em> ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was <em>a grove of olive trees<\/em> that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (<em>gath shemaney<\/em> means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:1-2<\/strong> <em>Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley<\/em><em>,<\/em> a dry river valley (a <em>wadi<\/em> ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was <em>a grove of olive trees<\/em> that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (<em>gath shemaney<\/em> means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1-2 Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley, a dry river valley (a wadi ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was a grove of olive trees that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (gath shemaney means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).","summary_en":"18:1-2 Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley, a dry river valley (a wadi ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was a grove of olive trees that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (gath shemaney means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":42289,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69915,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97541,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125167,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13719,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gethsemane","title_en":"Gethsemane","content_ro":"<h3>GETHSEMANE<\/h3>\n<p>Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53).<\/p>\n<p>The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclosed piece of ground. It may be that the grove was privately owned and that Jesus and his disciples had special permission to enter.<\/p>\n<p>Though the Gospels of Luke and John do not mention the word Gethsemane, they both record Jesus’ agony before his betrayal. Luke says the location was on the “Mount of Olives” (Lk 22:39). John describes the area as “across the Kidron Valley” (Jn 18:1); John’s is the only Gospel to call the spot a garden. From those accounts it is also evident that Jesus and his disciples gathered in Gethsemane often for fellowship and prayer (Lk 22:39; Jn 18:2). The Gospel narratives indicate that the garden was large enough for the group to separate into different parts of it.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GETHSEMANE<\/h3>\n<p>Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53).<\/p>\n<p>The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclosed piece of ground. It may be that the grove was privately owned and that Jesus and his disciples had special permission to enter.<\/p>\n<p>Though the Gospels of Luke and John do not mention the word Gethsemane, they both record Jesus’ agony before his betrayal. Luke says the location was on the “Mount of Olives” (Lk 22:39). John describes the area as “across the Kidron Valley” (Jn 18:1); John’s is the only Gospel to call the spot a garden. From those accounts it is also evident that Jesus and his disciples gathered in Gethsemane often for fellowship and prayer (Lk 22:39; Jn 18:2). The Gospel narratives indicate that the garden was large enough for the group to separate into different parts of it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GETHSEMANE Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53). The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclo...","summary_en":"GETHSEMANE Place to which Jesus and his disciples walked after their Last Supper together in the upper room. In Gethsemane, Jesus underwent a great inner struggle, as he realized the hour of his betrayal was at hand (Mt 26:36-56; Mk 14:32-50; Lk 22:39-53). The name Gethsemane, used only in the Gospels of Matthew (26:36) and Mark (14:32), means “oil press,” suggesting the presence of an olive grove. The use of the Greek word “place” in the Gospel accounts indicates that Gethsemane was an enclo...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21123,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Judas","title_en":"Judas","content_ro":"<h3>JUDAS<\/h3>\n<li>1. Simon’s son, surnamed Iscariot; one of the 12 disciples of Jesus. The derivation of Iscariot is uncertain. In all probability it designated the place of his birth, the town of Kerioth. His childhood home was perhaps Kerioth of Moab, east of the Jordan (Jer 48:24; Am 2:2), or Kerioth-hezron of southern Judah, also known as Hazor (Jos 15:25). A less feasible suggestion identifies Iscariot with an Aramaic word meaning “assassin,” a word eventually attached to Judas’s name because of his betrayal of Jesus.<\/li>\n<p>Judas Iscariot’s name appears last in the list of disciples (Mt 10:4; Mk 3:19; Lk 6:16), perhaps indicating his ignominy in the minds of later believers rather than his original importance among the Twelve. During Jesus’ public ministry, he managed the treasury of the group (Jn 13:29), from which he was known to pilfer money (12:6). As a betrayer, Judas contracted to turn Jesus over to the chief priests for 30 pieces of silver. He accomplished this act of treachery by singling out Jesus with a kiss in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:14-47; Mk 14:10-46; Lk 22:3-48; Jn 18:2-5).<\/p>\n<p>Various suggestions have been offered to explain Judas’s traitorous deed. (1) In keeping with his patriotic zeal, Judas turned Jesus over to the authorities after realizing that his Master did not intend to overthrow the Roman order and establish a Jewish state. (2) Judas believed Jesus to be the Messiah and planned his arrest in hope of urging Jesus to usher in his kingdom. (3) He was a scoundrel who had plotted wickedness since the start of Jesus’ public ministry. (4) Prompted by a satanic impulse, Judas betrayed Jesus; however, after recognizing that he was deceived, out of remorse he took his own life. (5) With damaged pride and humiliated ego from Jesus’ caustic rebukes, Judas, originally a loyal disciple, turned against him. (6) Judas, moved by his own greed, yielded to his selfish instincts, not realizing that Jesus would consequently be tried and killed; upon learning the outcome of his betrayal, he repented in despair and committed suicide.<\/p>\n<p>Judas, despondent over his act of betrayal, went out and hung himself in a field bought with his 30 pieces of silver (Mt 27:3-10). Acts 1:18 gruesomely adds that his body burst open, spilling out his intestines; for this reason the field was called the “Field of Blood” (Acts 1:19). Matthias later took Judas Iscariot’s place among the Twelve (v 26).<\/p>\n<li>2. Son of Joseph and Mary, and the brother of Jesus, James, Joseph, and Simon (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). Evidently Judas and his brothers rejected Jesus as Messiah (Jn 7:5) until after his resurrection (Acts 1:14). Later, it is thought, Judas (English “Jude”) authored the epistle named Jude.<\/li>\n<li>3. Son of James and one of the 12 disciples (Lk 6:16; Jn 14:22; Acts 1:13). He is identifiable with Thaddeus in Matthew 10:3 and Mark 3:18. <em>See<\/em> Thaddaeus, The Apostle.<\/li>\n<li>4. Galilean who led a Jewish revolt against the Romans because of the census taken by Quirinius in <span>AD<\/span> 6. In Acts 5:37 the Pharisee Gamaliel mentioned Judas as an example of one who unsuccessfully tried to gain the support of the Jewish people. Josephus credited him with founding the Jewish Zealot party, an extreme revolutionary movement that attempted to throw off Roman rule and to reestablish Jewish autonomy (<em>War<\/em> 2.8.1).<\/li>\n<li>5. Owner of a house along the street called Straight in Damascus. Here, following his conversion, Saul (Paul) found lodging and had his vision restored by Ananias (Acts 9:11).<\/li>\n<li>6. Prophet and leader in the early Jerusalem church. Judas, surnamed Barsabbas, was selected with Silas to accompany Paul and Barnabas to Antioch, where they confirmed the Jerusalem Council’s decision regarding the gentile church and subsequently encouraged its believers (Acts 15:22-32). <em>See<\/em> Joseph #12.<\/li>\n<li>7. KJV spelling of Judah, Jacob’s son (Mt 1:2-3). <em>See<\/em> Judah (Person) #1.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JUDAS<\/h3>\n<li>1. Simon’s son, surnamed Iscariot; one of the 12 disciples of Jesus. The derivation of Iscariot is uncertain. In all probability it designated the place of his birth, the town of Kerioth. His childhood home was perhaps Kerioth of Moab, east of the Jordan (Jer 48:24; Am 2:2), or Kerioth-hezron of southern Judah, also known as Hazor (Jos 15:25). A less feasible suggestion identifies Iscariot with an Aramaic word meaning “assassin,” a word eventually attached to Judas’s name because of his betrayal of Jesus.<\/li>\n<p>Judas Iscariot’s name appears last in the list of disciples (Mt 10:4; Mk 3:19; Lk 6:16), perhaps indicating his ignominy in the minds of later believers rather than his original importance among the Twelve. During Jesus’ public ministry, he managed the treasury of the group (Jn 13:29), from which he was known to pilfer money (12:6). As a betrayer, Judas contracted to turn Jesus over to the chief priests for 30 pieces of silver. He accomplished this act of treachery by singling out Jesus with a kiss in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:14-47; Mk 14:10-46; Lk 22:3-48; Jn 18:2-5).<\/p>\n<p>Various suggestions have been offered to explain Judas’s traitorous deed. (1) In keeping with his patriotic zeal, Judas turned Jesus over to the authorities after realizing that his Master did not intend to overthrow the Roman order and establish a Jewish state. (2) Judas believed Jesus to be the Messiah and planned his arrest in hope of urging Jesus to usher in his kingdom. (3) He was a scoundrel who had plotted wickedness since the start of Jesus’ public ministry. (4) Prompted by a satanic impulse, Judas betrayed Jesus; however, after recognizing that he was deceived, out of remorse he took his own life. (5) With damaged pride and humiliated ego from Jesus’ caustic rebukes, Judas, originally a loyal disciple, turned against him. (6) Judas, moved by his own greed, yielded to his selfish instincts, not realizing that Jesus would consequently be tried and killed; upon learning the outcome of his betrayal, he repented in despair and committed suicide.<\/p>\n<p>Judas, despondent over his act of betrayal, went out and hung himself in a field bought with his 30 pieces of silver (Mt 27:3-10). Acts 1:18 gruesomely adds that his body burst open, spilling out his intestines; for this reason the field was called the “Field of Blood” (Acts 1:19). Matthias later took Judas Iscariot’s place among the Twelve (v 26).<\/p>\n<li>2. Son of Joseph and Mary, and the brother of Jesus, James, Joseph, and Simon (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). Evidently Judas and his brothers rejected Jesus as Messiah (Jn 7:5) until after his resurrection (Acts 1:14). Later, it is thought, Judas (English “Jude”) authored the epistle named Jude.<\/li>\n<li>3. Son of James and one of the 12 disciples (Lk 6:16; Jn 14:22; Acts 1:13). He is identifiable with Thaddeus in Matthew 10:3 and Mark 3:18. <em>See<\/em> Thaddaeus, The Apostle.<\/li>\n<li>4. Galilean who led a Jewish revolt against the Romans because of the census taken by Quirinius in <span>AD<\/span> 6. In Acts 5:37 the Pharisee Gamaliel mentioned Judas as an example of one who unsuccessfully tried to gain the support of the Jewish people. Josephus credited him with founding the Jewish Zealot party, an extreme revolutionary movement that attempted to throw off Roman rule and to reestablish Jewish autonomy (<em>War<\/em> 2.8.1).<\/li>\n<li>5. Owner of a house along the street called Straight in Damascus. Here, following his conversion, Saul (Paul) found lodging and had his vision restored by Ananias (Acts 9:11).<\/li>\n<li>6. Prophet and leader in the early Jerusalem church. Judas, surnamed Barsabbas, was selected with Silas to accompany Paul and Barnabas to Antioch, where they confirmed the Jerusalem Council’s decision regarding the gentile church and subsequently encouraged its believers (Acts 15:22-32). <em>See<\/em> Joseph #12.<\/li>\n<li>7. KJV spelling of Judah, Jacob’s son (Mt 1:2-3). <em>See<\/em> Judah (Person) #1.<\/li>","summary_ro":"JUDAS 1. Simon’s son, surnamed Iscariot; one of the 12 disciples of Jesus. The derivation of Iscariot is uncertain. In all probability it designated the place of his birth, the town of Kerioth. His childhood home was perhaps Kerioth of Moab, east of the Jordan (Jer 48:24; Am 2:2), or Kerioth-hezron of southern Judah, also known as Hazor (Jos 15:25). A less feasible suggestion identifies Iscariot with an Aramaic word meaning “assassin,” a word eventually attached to Judas’s name because of his...","summary_en":"JUDAS 1. Simon’s son, surnamed Iscariot; one of the 12 disciples of Jesus. The derivation of Iscariot is uncertain. In all probability it designated the place of his birth, the town of Kerioth. His childhood home was perhaps Kerioth of Moab, east of the Jordan (Jer 48:24; Am 2:2), or Kerioth-hezron of southern Judah, also known as Hazor (Jos 15:25). A less feasible suggestion identifies Iscariot with an Aramaic word meaning “assassin,” a word eventually attached to Judas’s name because of his...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":42080,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69706,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97332,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124958,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19800,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jew","title_en":"Jew","content_ro":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","summary_en":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56706,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>18:3<\/strong> John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent <em>Roman soldiers and Temple guards<\/em><em>;<\/em> while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>18:3<\/strong> John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent <em>Roman soldiers and Temple guards<\/em><em>;<\/em> while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:3 John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent Roman soldiers and Temple guards; while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.","summary_en":"18:3 John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent Roman soldiers and Temple guards; while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84332,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>18:3<\/strong> John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent <em>Roman soldiers and Temple guards<\/em><em>;<\/em> while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>18:3<\/strong> John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent <em>Roman soldiers and Temple guards<\/em><em>;<\/em> while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:3 John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent Roman soldiers and Temple guards; while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.","summary_en":"18:3 John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent Roman soldiers and Temple guards; while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111958,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>18:3<\/strong> John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent <em>Roman soldiers and Temple guards<\/em><em>;<\/em> while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>18:3<\/strong> John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent <em>Roman soldiers and Temple guards<\/em><em>;<\/em> while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:3 John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent Roman soldiers and Temple guards; while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.","summary_en":"18:3 John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent Roman soldiers and Temple guards; while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139584,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:3","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:3","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>18:3<\/strong> John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent <em>Roman soldiers and Temple guards<\/em><em>;<\/em> while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>18:3<\/strong> John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent <em>Roman soldiers and Temple guards<\/em><em>;<\/em> while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:3 John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent Roman soldiers and Temple guards; while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.","summary_en":"18:3 John’s full description of the arresting party expands the picture from the other Gospels. The Temple authorities sent Roman soldiers and Temple guards; while the Temple guards made the arrest, the Roman detachment stood by to prevent a riot. The Roman detachment was large enough to warrant a commander (18:12) and came armed, anticipating a struggle (18:10). Numerous men had claimed to be the Messiah, and often they had made politically explosive attempts to expel the Romans.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":27083,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nazarene","title_en":"Nazarene","content_ro":"<h3>NAZARENE<\/h3>\n<p>Native or inhabitant of Nazareth, a NT town in lower Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>Nazareth was Jesus’ hometown during the first 30 years of his life. Since the name Jesus was a common name among the Jews, and since surnames were not used, perhaps the designation Nazarene differentiated Jesus of Nazareth from others with the same name (see Greek texts of Mt 27:16-17; Acts 7:45; Col 4:11; and Heb 4:8, where the name Jesus refers to other men).<\/p>\n<p>In the original texts, the designation Jesus the Nazarene was used by demons (Mk 1:24; Lk 4:34), the crowd outside Jericho (Mk 10:47; Lk 18:37), a servant girl (Mk 14:67), soldiers (Jn 18:5-7), Pilate (Jn 19:19), the two disciples on the road to Emmaus (Lk 24:19), and the angel at the tomb (Mk 16:6).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles in Acts used the designation to identify Jesus. Peter speaks of Jesus the Nazarene in his sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:22), and at the temple gate in a subsequent healing (3:6; 4:10). Paul identifies Jesus as such in Acts 26:9.<\/p>\n<p>One hostile reference to the name is in Acts 6:14. The false witnesses against Stephen accused him before the Sanhedrin of saying, “This Nazarene, Jesus, will destroy this place [temple] and alter the customs that Moses handed down to us” (see Greek). Another antagonistic reference is in Acts 24:5, the only reference to Jesus’ followers as Nazarenes. Tertullus accused Paul, saying, “For we have found him to be a troublemaker, a man who is constantly inciting the Jews throughout the world to riots and rebellions against the Roman government. He is a ringleader of the sect known as the Nazarenes” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>With regard to the name “Nazarene,” Matthew 2:23 has always been problematic: “So they went and lived in a town called Nazareth. This fulfilled what was spoken by the prophets concerning the Messiah: ‘He will be called a Nazarene’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). No OT prophecy directly states that the Messiah would be called a Nazarene. Some scholars relate Matthew’s reference to Isaiah 11:1, which speaks of the Messiah as a Branch, a Hebrew term derived from the same root as “Nazareth.” Others suggest that the OT prophecies concern the despising and reviling of the Messiah as having been thought by others to be a Nazarene, when it was well known that the Messiah was supposed to come from Bethlehem, the city of David. Of course, that is where Jesus was born, but he was raised in Nazareth and subsequently was known as a Nazarene and thereby ridiculed. Thus, the prophecy was fulfilled when some of his contemporaries called him a Nazarene, from the despised town of Nazareth (Jn 1:46; cf. Mt 13:54; Mk 6:2-3; Lk 4:22).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Nazareth.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NAZARENE<\/h3>\n<p>Native or inhabitant of Nazareth, a NT town in lower Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>Nazareth was Jesus’ hometown during the first 30 years of his life. Since the name Jesus was a common name among the Jews, and since surnames were not used, perhaps the designation Nazarene differentiated Jesus of Nazareth from others with the same name (see Greek texts of Mt 27:16-17; Acts 7:45; Col 4:11; and Heb 4:8, where the name Jesus refers to other men).<\/p>\n<p>In the original texts, the designation Jesus the Nazarene was used by demons (Mk 1:24; Lk 4:34), the crowd outside Jericho (Mk 10:47; Lk 18:37), a servant girl (Mk 14:67), soldiers (Jn 18:5-7), Pilate (Jn 19:19), the two disciples on the road to Emmaus (Lk 24:19), and the angel at the tomb (Mk 16:6).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles in Acts used the designation to identify Jesus. Peter speaks of Jesus the Nazarene in his sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:22), and at the temple gate in a subsequent healing (3:6; 4:10). Paul identifies Jesus as such in Acts 26:9.<\/p>\n<p>One hostile reference to the name is in Acts 6:14. The false witnesses against Stephen accused him before the Sanhedrin of saying, “This Nazarene, Jesus, will destroy this place [temple] and alter the customs that Moses handed down to us” (see Greek). Another antagonistic reference is in Acts 24:5, the only reference to Jesus’ followers as Nazarenes. Tertullus accused Paul, saying, “For we have found him to be a troublemaker, a man who is constantly inciting the Jews throughout the world to riots and rebellions against the Roman government. He is a ringleader of the sect known as the Nazarenes” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>With regard to the name “Nazarene,” Matthew 2:23 has always been problematic: “So they went and lived in a town called Nazareth. This fulfilled what was spoken by the prophets concerning the Messiah: ‘He will be called a Nazarene’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). No OT prophecy directly states that the Messiah would be called a Nazarene. Some scholars relate Matthew’s reference to Isaiah 11:1, which speaks of the Messiah as a Branch, a Hebrew term derived from the same root as “Nazareth.” Others suggest that the OT prophecies concern the despising and reviling of the Messiah as having been thought by others to be a Nazarene, when it was well known that the Messiah was supposed to come from Bethlehem, the city of David. Of course, that is where Jesus was born, but he was raised in Nazareth and subsequently was known as a Nazarene and thereby ridiculed. Thus, the prophecy was fulfilled when some of his contemporaries called him a Nazarene, from the despised town of Nazareth (Jn 1:46; cf. Mt 13:54; Mk 6:2-3; Lk 4:22).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Nazareth.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NAZARENE Native or inhabitant of Nazareth, a NT town in lower Galilee. Nazareth was Jesus’ hometown during the first 30 years of his life. Since the name Jesus was a common name among the Jews, and since surnames were not used, perhaps the designation Nazarene differentiated Jesus of Nazareth from others with the same name (see Greek texts of Mt 27:16-17; Acts 7:45; Col 4:11; and Heb 4:8, where the name Jesus refers to other men). In the original texts, the designation Jesus the Nazarene was ...","summary_en":"NAZARENE Native or inhabitant of Nazareth, a NT town in lower Galilee. Nazareth was Jesus’ hometown during the first 30 years of his life. Since the name Jesus was a common name among the Jews, and since surnames were not used, perhaps the designation Nazarene differentiated Jesus of Nazareth from others with the same name (see Greek texts of Mt 27:16-17; Acts 7:45; Col 4:11; and Heb 4:8, where the name Jesus refers to other men). In the original texts, the designation Jesus the Nazarene was ...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27108,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nazareth","title_en":"Nazareth","content_ro":"<h3>NAZARETH<\/h3>\n<p>Village in the Roman province of Galilee, the home of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus. Always small and isolated, Nazareth is not mentioned in the OT, the Apocrypha, intertestamental Jewish writings, or the histories of Josephus. The town lies just north of the plain of Esdraelon in the limestone hills of the southern Lebanon range. It is situated on three sides of a hill. This location forms a sheltered valley with a moderate climate favorable to fruits and wildflowers. Trade routes and roads passed near Nazareth, but the village itself was not on any main road. Nazareth is about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) west of the Sea of Galilee and 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) east of the Mediterranean. Jerusalem lies about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers) south. Archaeological remains indicate that the ancient town was higher on the western hill than the present village (cf. Lk 4:29). In the time of Christ, Nazareth, along with the entire region of south Galilee, lay outside the mainstream of Jewish life, providing the background for Nathanael’s wry remark to Philip, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” (Jn 1:46).<\/p>\n\n<p>Nazareth is first mentioned in the NT as the home of Mary and Joseph (Lk 1:26-27). Sometime after Jesus was born at his parents’ ancestral town of Bethlehem (about 80 miles, or 128.7 kilometers, to the south), Mary and Joseph returned to Nazareth (Mt 2:23; Lk 2:39). Jesus grew up there (Lk 2:39-40, 51), leaving the village to be baptized by John in the Jordan River (Mk 1:9). When John was arrested, Jesus moved to Capernaum (Mt 4:13). Though Jesus was often identified by his boyhood city as “Jesus of Nazareth” (see Mk 10:47; Jn 18:5, 7; Acts 2:22), the NT records only one subsequent visit by Jesus to Nazareth. On this occasion, Jesus preached in the synagogue and was rejected by the townspeople (Lk 4:16-30; cf. Mt 13:54-58; Mk 6:1-6). Jesus’ followers were also derisively called “Nazarenes” (Acts 24:5).<\/p>\n\n<p>Nazareth remained a Jewish city until the time of the emperor Constantine (d. <span>AD<\/span> 327), when it became a sacred place for Christian pilgrims. A large basilica was built in Nazareth about <span>AD<\/span> 600. Arabs and Crusaders alternately controlled the village until 1517, when it fell to the Turks, who forced all Christians to leave. Christians returned in 1620, and the town became an important Christian center.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Nazarene.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NAZARETH<\/h3>\n<p>Village in the Roman province of Galilee, the home of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus. Always small and isolated, Nazareth is not mentioned in the OT, the Apocrypha, intertestamental Jewish writings, or the histories of Josephus. The town lies just north of the plain of Esdraelon in the limestone hills of the southern Lebanon range. It is situated on three sides of a hill. This location forms a sheltered valley with a moderate climate favorable to fruits and wildflowers. Trade routes and roads passed near Nazareth, but the village itself was not on any main road. Nazareth is about 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) west of the Sea of Galilee and 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) east of the Mediterranean. Jerusalem lies about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers) south. Archaeological remains indicate that the ancient town was higher on the western hill than the present village (cf. Lk 4:29). In the time of Christ, Nazareth, along with the entire region of south Galilee, lay outside the mainstream of Jewish life, providing the background for Nathanael’s wry remark to Philip, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” (Jn 1:46).<\/p>\n\n<p>Nazareth is first mentioned in the NT as the home of Mary and Joseph (Lk 1:26-27). Sometime after Jesus was born at his parents’ ancestral town of Bethlehem (about 80 miles, or 128.7 kilometers, to the south), Mary and Joseph returned to Nazareth (Mt 2:23; Lk 2:39). Jesus grew up there (Lk 2:39-40, 51), leaving the village to be baptized by John in the Jordan River (Mk 1:9). When John was arrested, Jesus moved to Capernaum (Mt 4:13). Though Jesus was often identified by his boyhood city as “Jesus of Nazareth” (see Mk 10:47; Jn 18:5, 7; Acts 2:22), the NT records only one subsequent visit by Jesus to Nazareth. On this occasion, Jesus preached in the synagogue and was rejected by the townspeople (Lk 4:16-30; cf. Mt 13:54-58; Mk 6:1-6). Jesus’ followers were also derisively called “Nazarenes” (Acts 24:5).<\/p>\n\n<p>Nazareth remained a Jewish city until the time of the emperor Constantine (d. <span>AD<\/span> 327), when it became a sacred place for Christian pilgrims. A large basilica was built in Nazareth about <span>AD<\/span> 600. Arabs and Crusaders alternately controlled the village until 1517, when it fell to the Turks, who forced all Christians to leave. Christians returned in 1620, and the town became an important Christian center.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Nazarene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NAZARETH Village in the Roman province of Galilee, the home of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus. Always small and isolated, Nazareth is not mentioned in the OT, the Apocrypha, intertestamental Jewish writings, or the histories of Josephus. The town lies just north of the plain of Esdraelon in the limestone hills of the southern Lebanon range. It is situated on three sides of a hill. This location forms a sheltered valley with a moderate climate favorable to fruits and wildflowers. Trade routes and roa...","summary_en":"NAZARETH Village in the Roman province of Galilee, the home of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus. Always small and isolated, Nazareth is not mentioned in the OT, the Apocrypha, intertestamental Jewish writings, or the histories of Josephus. The town lies just north of the plain of Esdraelon in the limestone hills of the southern Lebanon range. It is situated on three sides of a hill. This location forms a sheltered valley with a moderate climate favorable to fruits and wildflowers. Trade routes and roa...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56707,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:5<\/strong> <span>I Am<\/span><em> he<\/em> (literally <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:5<\/strong> <span>I Am<\/span><em> he<\/em> (literally <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:5 I Am he (literally I am): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).","summary_en":"18:5 I Am he (literally I am): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84333,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:5<\/strong> <span>I Am<\/span><em> he<\/em> (literally <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:5<\/strong> <span>I Am<\/span><em> he<\/em> (literally <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:5 I Am he (literally I am): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).","summary_en":"18:5 I Am he (literally I am): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111959,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:5<\/strong> <span>I Am<\/span><em> he<\/em> (literally <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:5<\/strong> <span>I Am<\/span><em> he<\/em> (literally <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:5 I Am he (literally I am): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).","summary_en":"18:5 I Am he (literally I am): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139585,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:5<\/strong> <span>I Am<\/span><em> he<\/em> (literally <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:5<\/strong> <span>I Am<\/span><em> he<\/em> (literally <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:5 I Am he (literally I am): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).","summary_en":"18:5 I Am he (literally I am): Jesus identified himself by the divine name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 8:24, 58).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":56708,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:6","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 10\"><strong>18:6<\/strong> The soldiers and guards <em>all drew back<\/em> before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, <em>fell to the ground<\/em> before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 10\"><strong>18:6<\/strong> The soldiers and guards <em>all drew back<\/em> before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, <em>fell to the ground<\/em> before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:6 The soldiers and guards all drew back before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, fell to the ground before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.","summary_en":"18:6 The soldiers and guards all drew back before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, fell to the ground before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84334,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:6","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 10\"><strong>18:6<\/strong> The soldiers and guards <em>all drew back<\/em> before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, <em>fell to the ground<\/em> before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 10\"><strong>18:6<\/strong> The soldiers and guards <em>all drew back<\/em> before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, <em>fell to the ground<\/em> before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:6 The soldiers and guards all drew back before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, fell to the ground before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.","summary_en":"18:6 The soldiers and guards all drew back before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, fell to the ground before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111960,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:6","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 10\"><strong>18:6<\/strong> The soldiers and guards <em>all drew back<\/em> before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, <em>fell to the ground<\/em> before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 10\"><strong>18:6<\/strong> The soldiers and guards <em>all drew back<\/em> before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, <em>fell to the ground<\/em> before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:6 The soldiers and guards all drew back before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, fell to the ground before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.","summary_en":"18:6 The soldiers and guards all drew back before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, fell to the ground before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139586,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:6","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:6","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 10\"><strong>18:6<\/strong> The soldiers and guards <em>all drew back<\/em> before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, <em>fell to the ground<\/em> before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 10\"><strong>18:6<\/strong> The soldiers and guards <em>all drew back<\/em> before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, <em>fell to the ground<\/em> before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:6 The soldiers and guards all drew back before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, fell to the ground before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.","summary_en":"18:6 The soldiers and guards all drew back before the Lord (cp. Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28; Dan 10:9; Acts 9:4; Rev 1:17). Even Roman soldiers, who were trained not to fall, fell to the ground before Christ. Although they took this posture of submission, they didn’t really understand what had occurred and proceeded with the arrest.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":56709,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:8<\/strong> <span>I Am:<\/span> Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:8<\/strong> <span>I Am:<\/span> Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:8 I Am: Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).","summary_en":"18:8 I Am: Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84335,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:8<\/strong> <span>I Am:<\/span> Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:8<\/strong> <span>I Am:<\/span> Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:8 I Am: Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).","summary_en":"18:8 I Am: Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111961,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:8<\/strong> <span>I Am:<\/span> Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:8<\/strong> <span>I Am:<\/span> Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:8 I Am: Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).","summary_en":"18:8 I Am: Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139587,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:8","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:8","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:8<\/strong> <span>I Am:<\/span> Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:8<\/strong> <span>I Am:<\/span> Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:8 I Am: Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).","summary_en":"18:8 I Am: Jesus used God’s divine name for the second time (see study note on 18:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":56710,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:9","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:9<\/strong> <em>I did not lose a single one:<\/em> Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:9<\/strong> <em>I did not lose a single one:<\/em> Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:9 I did not lose a single one: Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).","summary_en":"18:9 I did not lose a single one: Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84336,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:9","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:9<\/strong> <em>I did not lose a single one:<\/em> Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:9<\/strong> <em>I did not lose a single one:<\/em> Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:9 I did not lose a single one: Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).","summary_en":"18:9 I did not lose a single one: Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111962,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:9","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:9<\/strong> <em>I did not lose a single one:<\/em> Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:9<\/strong> <em>I did not lose a single one:<\/em> Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:9 I did not lose a single one: Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).","summary_en":"18:9 I did not lose a single one: Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139588,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:9","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:9<\/strong> <em>I did not lose a single one:<\/em> Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:9<\/strong> <em>I did not lose a single one:<\/em> Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:9 I did not lose a single one: Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).","summary_en":"18:9 I did not lose a single one: Jesus continued to be a good shepherd, offering his life for the sheep and protecting them from the wolves (10:11-15). From the beginning, however, Judas Iscariot had not been a true disciple of Jesus (17:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":42183,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69809,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97435,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125061,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24112,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Malchus","title_en":"Malchus","content_ro":"<h3>MALCHUS<\/h3>\n<p>Name of a slave of the high priest in John 18:10. At the time of Jesus’ arrest, Peter struck Malchus with a sword, cutting off his right ear. In Matthew 26:51, Mark 14:47, and Luke 22:50-51, no name is given for this person. According to Luke, Jesus immediately healed the wound.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MALCHUS<\/h3>\n<p>Name of a slave of the high priest in John 18:10. At the time of Jesus’ arrest, Peter struck Malchus with a sword, cutting off his right ear. In Matthew 26:51, Mark 14:47, and Luke 22:50-51, no name is given for this person. According to Luke, Jesus immediately healed the wound.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MALCHUS Name of a slave of the high priest in John 18:10. At the time of Jesus’ arrest, Peter struck Malchus with a sword, cutting off his right ear. In Matthew 26:51, Mark 14:47, and Luke 22:50-51, no name is given for this person. According to Luke, Jesus immediately healed the wound.","summary_en":"MALCHUS Name of a slave of the high priest in John 18:10. At the time of Jesus’ arrest, Peter struck Malchus with a sword, cutting off his right ear. In Matthew 26:51, Mark 14:47, and Luke 22:50-51, no name is given for this person. According to Luke, Jesus immediately healed the wound.","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56711,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:10","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:10-11<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter drew<\/em> a short <em>sword<\/em> or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name <em>Malchus<\/em> means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • <em>Put your sword back:<\/em> Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:10-11<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter drew<\/em> a short <em>sword<\/em> or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name <em>Malchus<\/em> means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • <em>Put your sword back:<\/em> Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:10-11 Simon Peter drew a short sword or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name Malchus means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • Put your sword back: Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.","summary_en":"18:10-11 Simon Peter drew a short sword or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name Malchus means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • Put your sword back: Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84337,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:10","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:10-11<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter drew<\/em> a short <em>sword<\/em> or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name <em>Malchus<\/em> means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • <em>Put your sword back:<\/em> Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:10-11<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter drew<\/em> a short <em>sword<\/em> or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name <em>Malchus<\/em> means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • <em>Put your sword back:<\/em> Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:10-11 Simon Peter drew a short sword or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name Malchus means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • Put your sword back: Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.","summary_en":"18:10-11 Simon Peter drew a short sword or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name Malchus means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • Put your sword back: Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111963,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:10","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:10-11<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter drew<\/em> a short <em>sword<\/em> or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name <em>Malchus<\/em> means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • <em>Put your sword back:<\/em> Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:10-11<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter drew<\/em> a short <em>sword<\/em> or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name <em>Malchus<\/em> means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • <em>Put your sword back:<\/em> Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:10-11 Simon Peter drew a short sword or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name Malchus means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • Put your sword back: Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.","summary_en":"18:10-11 Simon Peter drew a short sword or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name Malchus means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • Put your sword back: Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139589,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:10","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:10-11<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter drew<\/em> a short <em>sword<\/em> or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name <em>Malchus<\/em> means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • <em>Put your sword back:<\/em> Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:10-11<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter drew<\/em> a short <em>sword<\/em> or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name <em>Malchus<\/em> means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • <em>Put your sword back:<\/em> Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:10-11 Simon Peter drew a short sword or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name Malchus means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • Put your sword back: Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.","summary_en":"18:10-11 Simon Peter drew a short sword or a long knife that was generally worn with everyday garments. • The Hebrew name Malchus means “king,” a detail that John might have included for its wordplay on Jesus’ true identity (see 18:36-37; 19:19). • Put your sword back: Jesus’ mission was not to fight for his life, but to die for ours.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":8296,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cup","title_en":"Cup","content_ro":"<h3>CUP<\/h3>\n<p>The word may refer either to the vessel itself or to its contents and may be intended literally or figuratively.<\/p>\n<p>1. A small drinking vessel, made of various materials (leather, metal, or pottery), sizes, and designs.<\/p>\n<li>2. A figure of speech to represent one’s portion of or participation in something. It is associated with consolation (Jer 16:7), demons (1 Cor 10:21), divination (Gn 44:2, 5), drunkenness (Prv 23:31), immorality (Rv 17:4; 18:6), inheritance (Ps 16:5), judgment (Pss 11:6; 75:8; Is 51:17, 22; Jer 49:12; Ez 23:33; Zec 12:2; Rv 14:10; 16:19; 18:6), the Lord (1 Cor 10:21), prosperity or blessing (Ps 23:5), salvation (Ps 116:13), suffering (Mt 20:22; 26:39; Mk 10:39; 14:36; Lk 22:42; Jn 18:11), and thanksgiving (1 Cor 10:16).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cup of Blessing.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CUP<\/h3>\n<p>The word may refer either to the vessel itself or to its contents and may be intended literally or figuratively.<\/p>\n<p>1. A small drinking vessel, made of various materials (leather, metal, or pottery), sizes, and designs.<\/p>\n<li>2. A figure of speech to represent one’s portion of or participation in something. It is associated with consolation (Jer 16:7), demons (1 Cor 10:21), divination (Gn 44:2, 5), drunkenness (Prv 23:31), immorality (Rv 17:4; 18:6), inheritance (Ps 16:5), judgment (Pss 11:6; 75:8; Is 51:17, 22; Jer 49:12; Ez 23:33; Zec 12:2; Rv 14:10; 16:19; 18:6), the Lord (1 Cor 10:21), prosperity or blessing (Ps 23:5), salvation (Ps 116:13), suffering (Mt 20:22; 26:39; Mk 10:39; 14:36; Lk 22:42; Jn 18:11), and thanksgiving (1 Cor 10:16).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cup of Blessing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CUP The word may refer either to the vessel itself or to its contents and may be intended literally or figuratively. 1. A small drinking vessel, made of various materials (leather, metal, or pottery), sizes, and designs. 2. A figure of speech to represent one’s portion of or participation in something. It is associated with consolation (Jer 16:7), demons (1 Cor 10:21), divination (Gn 44:2, 5), drunkenness (Prv 23:31), immorality (Rv 17:4; 18:6), inheritance (Ps 16:5), judgment (Pss 11:6; 75:8...","summary_en":"CUP The word may refer either to the vessel itself or to its contents and may be intended literally or figuratively. 1. A small drinking vessel, made of various materials (leather, metal, or pottery), sizes, and designs. 2. A figure of speech to represent one’s portion of or participation in something. It is associated with consolation (Jer 16:7), demons (1 Cor 10:21), divination (Gn 44:2, 5), drunkenness (Prv 23:31), immorality (Rv 17:4; 18:6), inheritance (Ps 16:5), judgment (Pss 11:6; 75:8...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":20235,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28939,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Passion*","title_en":"Passion*","content_ro":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","summary_en":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56712,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:12","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:12-14<\/strong> Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • <em>First they took him to Annas<\/em><em>,<\/em> who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> his son-in-law, was the official <em>high priest at that time<\/em> (see 18:24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:12-14<\/strong> Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • <em>First they took him to Annas<\/em><em>,<\/em> who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> his son-in-law, was the official <em>high priest at that time<\/em> (see 18:24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:12-14 Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • First they took him to Annas, who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). Caiaphas, his son-in-law, was the official high priest at that time (see 18:24).","summary_en":"18:12-14 Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • First they took him to Annas, who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). Caiaphas, his son-in-law, was the official high priest at that time (see 18:24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84338,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:12","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:12-14<\/strong> Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • <em>First they took him to Annas<\/em><em>,<\/em> who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> his son-in-law, was the official <em>high priest at that time<\/em> (see 18:24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:12-14<\/strong> Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • <em>First they took him to Annas<\/em><em>,<\/em> who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> his son-in-law, was the official <em>high priest at that time<\/em> (see 18:24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:12-14 Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • First they took him to Annas, who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). Caiaphas, his son-in-law, was the official high priest at that time (see 18:24).","summary_en":"18:12-14 Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • First they took him to Annas, who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). Caiaphas, his son-in-law, was the official high priest at that time (see 18:24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111964,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:12","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:12-14<\/strong> Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • <em>First they took him to Annas<\/em><em>,<\/em> who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> his son-in-law, was the official <em>high priest at that time<\/em> (see 18:24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:12-14<\/strong> Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • <em>First they took him to Annas<\/em><em>,<\/em> who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> his son-in-law, was the official <em>high priest at that time<\/em> (see 18:24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:12-14 Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • First they took him to Annas, who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). Caiaphas, his son-in-law, was the official high priest at that time (see 18:24).","summary_en":"18:12-14 Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • First they took him to Annas, who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). Caiaphas, his son-in-law, was the official high priest at that time (see 18:24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139590,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:12","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:12","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:12-14<\/strong> Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • <em>First they took him to Annas<\/em><em>,<\/em> who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> his son-in-law, was the official <em>high priest at that time<\/em> (see 18:24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>18:12-14<\/strong> Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • <em>First they took him to Annas<\/em><em>,<\/em> who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). <em>Caiaphas<\/em><em>,<\/em> his son-in-law, was the official <em>high priest at that time<\/em> (see 18:24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:12-14 Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • First they took him to Annas, who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). Caiaphas, his son-in-law, was the official high priest at that time (see 18:24).","summary_en":"18:12-14 Jesus was bound by the soldiers and returned to Jerusalem. • First they took him to Annas, who had been the high priest and remained highly influential (five of his sons also became high priests). Caiaphas, his son-in-law, was the official high priest at that time (see 18:24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":42525,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas","title_en":"Annas and Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","summary_en":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70151,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas","title_en":"Annas and Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","summary_en":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97777,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas","title_en":"Annas and Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","summary_en":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125403,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas","title_en":"Annas and Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Annas and Caiaphas<\/h3>\n<p>Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death.<\/p>\n<p>Annas was the Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high priests retain their position for life. Five of his sons and his son-in-law Caiaphas became high priests after him. According to the Gospel of John, when Jesus was arrested, he was brought to Annas for his initial interrogation before he was turned over to Caiaphas for the official trial (John 18:13-24).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas was the official Jewish high priest around <span>AD<\/span> 18–36. He worked closely with his powerful father-in-law, Annas. Caiaphas had argued in the high council that it would be better for Jesus to be sacrificed than for the entire nation to be destroyed (John 11:49-50). These prophetic words were given to him by God because of his role as high priest (John 11:51-52). At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas tore his robes at Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God and urged the high council to condemn him for blasphemy (Matt 26:57-66).<\/p>\n<p>Not long after the execution of Jesus, the Jewish authorities became increasingly disturbed over the rapidly growing numbers of believers in Christ. Annas and Caiaphas actively involved themselves in the interrogation of Peter and John over their healing a crippled beggar and their preaching about the resurrection of the dead (Acts 4:5-7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:3-5, 57-67; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 3:2; John 11:49-53; John 18:13-28; Acts 4:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","summary_en":"Annas and Caiaphas Annas and Caiaphas were both spoken of as high priests during the time of Jesus, and they were instrumental in getting Jesus condemned to death. Annas was the Jewish high priest around AD 6–15. But even after he was officially deposed by the Roman procurator of Judea, he retained considerable power and influence in the Jewish high council and was still spoken of as “high priest” fifteen to twenty years later (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6)—perhaps because of the Jewish view that high ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":2132,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Annas","title_en":"Annas","content_ro":"<h3>ANNAS<\/h3>\n<p>Jewish high priest from <span>AD<\/span> 7 to 15. Appointed by Quirinius, Roman governor of Syria, Annas was put out of office by Valerius Gratus, procurator of Judea. Annas was succeeded by three minor figures before the post was assumed by his son-in-law Caiaphas (Jn 18:13, 24). The tenure of Caiaphas extended from <span>AD<\/span> 18 to 36; thus, he was high priest at the time of Jesus’ public ministry.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently Annas’s power and influence remained considerable even after his removal from that office. Like an American Supreme Court justice, the high priest held a lifetime appointment. Deposition of a high priest by the pagan Romans would have been strongly resented by the Jews. Consequently, Annas may still have been referred to as high priest among the populace, as a sort of high priest emeritus. Such a practice, evidenced in the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus, tends to clear up those references in the NT to Annas as high priest during the same chronological period as Caiaphas (Lk 3:2; Jn 18:19, 22-24; Acts 4:6). The fact that Annas conducted a private inquiry of Jesus after he was arrested (Jn 18:13, 19-24) but before he was taken to Caiaphas, is a strong indication that Annas was still a person of considerable stature among the Jewish religious leaders.<\/p>\n<p>Annas is also mentioned in the NT account of an investigation of the apostles Peter and John. Interestingly, the penalty imposed on the apostles was far less severe than the one Jesus suffered (Acts 4:6-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANNAS<\/h3>\n<p>Jewish high priest from <span>AD<\/span> 7 to 15. Appointed by Quirinius, Roman governor of Syria, Annas was put out of office by Valerius Gratus, procurator of Judea. Annas was succeeded by three minor figures before the post was assumed by his son-in-law Caiaphas (Jn 18:13, 24). The tenure of Caiaphas extended from <span>AD<\/span> 18 to 36; thus, he was high priest at the time of Jesus’ public ministry.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently Annas’s power and influence remained considerable even after his removal from that office. Like an American Supreme Court justice, the high priest held a lifetime appointment. Deposition of a high priest by the pagan Romans would have been strongly resented by the Jews. Consequently, Annas may still have been referred to as high priest among the populace, as a sort of high priest emeritus. Such a practice, evidenced in the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus, tends to clear up those references in the NT to Annas as high priest during the same chronological period as Caiaphas (Lk 3:2; Jn 18:19, 22-24; Acts 4:6). The fact that Annas conducted a private inquiry of Jesus after he was arrested (Jn 18:13, 19-24) but before he was taken to Caiaphas, is a strong indication that Annas was still a person of considerable stature among the Jewish religious leaders.<\/p>\n<p>Annas is also mentioned in the NT account of an investigation of the apostles Peter and John. Interestingly, the penalty imposed on the apostles was far less severe than the one Jesus suffered (Acts 4:6-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANNAS Jewish high priest from AD 7 to 15. Appointed by Quirinius, Roman governor of Syria, Annas was put out of office by Valerius Gratus, procurator of Judea. Annas was succeeded by three minor figures before the post was assumed by his son-in-law Caiaphas (Jn 18:13, 24). The tenure of Caiaphas extended from AD 18 to 36; thus, he was high priest at the time of Jesus’ public ministry. Evidently Annas’s power and influence remained considerable even after his removal from that office. Like an ...","summary_en":"ANNAS Jewish high priest from AD 7 to 15. Appointed by Quirinius, Roman governor of Syria, Annas was put out of office by Valerius Gratus, procurator of Judea. Annas was succeeded by three minor figures before the post was assumed by his son-in-law Caiaphas (Jn 18:13, 24). The tenure of Caiaphas extended from AD 18 to 36; thus, he was high priest at the time of Jesus’ public ministry. Evidently Annas’s power and influence remained considerable even after his removal from that office. Like an ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5925,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Caiaphas","title_en":"Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>CAIAPHAS<\/h3>\n<p>High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the time. The activities of the Zealots were increasing and were destined to break out soon into open revolt.<\/p>\n<p>A huge stir among the people, caused by the raising of Lazarus (Jn 11), brought matters to a head. Alarmed lest the activities of those seeking a political messiah should lead the Romans to intervene with armed force, Caiaphas advised that Jesus should be put to death (Jn 11:48-50). The Gospel writer John pointed out that, in so doing, Caiaphas unwittingly prophesied concerning the atoning nature of Jesus’ death (Jn 11:51-52).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas played a chief role in Jesus’ arrest and trial. The leaders laid their plans in his palace (Mt 26:3-5); it was there also that part of Jesus’ preliminary trial took place with Caiaphas presiding (vv 57-68). That was after Jesus had first been taken before Annas, Caiaphas’s father-in-law (Jn 18:13). Matthew, Mark, and Luke omit the visit to Annas, and Mark and Luke do not refer to Caiaphas by name. Upon Jesus’ admission that he was “the Christ, the Son of God,” Caiaphas tore his robes and charged him with blasphemy (Mt 26:63-66). After Pentecost, he, along with other Jewish leaders, presided over the trial of Peter and John when the council attempted to stop the preaching of the apostles (Acts 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Annas, who had held the office of high priest before Caiaphas, remained influential in the affairs of the nation. That explains why Luke, in his Gospel, set the ministry of John the Baptist “in the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas” (Lk 3:2), and in Acts called Annas the high priest (Acts 4:6). John’s account of Jesus’ visit to Annas makes plain that Annas was still popularly referred to as “high priest” (Jn 18:22).<\/p>\n<p>The historian Josephus records that Caiaphas was appointed to his office about <span>AD<\/span> 18 and ruled until he was deposed about <span>AD<\/span> 36. The high priest held office at the whim of the Romans, so Caiaphas’s unusually long term indicates that he was a man of considerable political skill. Caiaphas was removed from his position by the proconsul Vitellus, and nothing more is known of him.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CAIAPHAS<\/h3>\n<p>High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the time. The activities of the Zealots were increasing and were destined to break out soon into open revolt.<\/p>\n<p>A huge stir among the people, caused by the raising of Lazarus (Jn 11), brought matters to a head. Alarmed lest the activities of those seeking a political messiah should lead the Romans to intervene with armed force, Caiaphas advised that Jesus should be put to death (Jn 11:48-50). The Gospel writer John pointed out that, in so doing, Caiaphas unwittingly prophesied concerning the atoning nature of Jesus’ death (Jn 11:51-52).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas played a chief role in Jesus’ arrest and trial. The leaders laid their plans in his palace (Mt 26:3-5); it was there also that part of Jesus’ preliminary trial took place with Caiaphas presiding (vv 57-68). That was after Jesus had first been taken before Annas, Caiaphas’s father-in-law (Jn 18:13). Matthew, Mark, and Luke omit the visit to Annas, and Mark and Luke do not refer to Caiaphas by name. Upon Jesus’ admission that he was “the Christ, the Son of God,” Caiaphas tore his robes and charged him with blasphemy (Mt 26:63-66). After Pentecost, he, along with other Jewish leaders, presided over the trial of Peter and John when the council attempted to stop the preaching of the apostles (Acts 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Annas, who had held the office of high priest before Caiaphas, remained influential in the affairs of the nation. That explains why Luke, in his Gospel, set the ministry of John the Baptist “in the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas” (Lk 3:2), and in Acts called Annas the high priest (Acts 4:6). John’s account of Jesus’ visit to Annas makes plain that Annas was still popularly referred to as “high priest” (Jn 18:22).<\/p>\n<p>The historian Josephus records that Caiaphas was appointed to his office about <span>AD<\/span> 18 and ruled until he was deposed about <span>AD<\/span> 36. The high priest held office at the whim of the Romans, so Caiaphas’s unusually long term indicates that he was a man of considerable political skill. Caiaphas was removed from his position by the proconsul Vitellus, and nothing more is known of him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CAIAPHAS High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the tim...","summary_en":"CAIAPHAS High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the tim...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19561,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":19799,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jew","title_en":"Jew","content_ro":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","summary_en":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56713,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> <em>one man should die for the people:<\/em> Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> <em>one man should die for the people:<\/em> Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:14 one man should die for the people: Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.","summary_en":"18:14 one man should die for the people: Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84339,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> <em>one man should die for the people:<\/em> Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> <em>one man should die for the people:<\/em> Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:14 one man should die for the people: Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.","summary_en":"18:14 one man should die for the people: Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111965,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> <em>one man should die for the people:<\/em> Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> <em>one man should die for the people:<\/em> Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:14 one man should die for the people: Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.","summary_en":"18:14 one man should die for the people: Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139591,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> <em>one man should die for the people:<\/em> Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> <em>one man should die for the people:<\/em> Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:14 one man should die for the people: Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.","summary_en":"18:14 one man should die for the people: Caiaphas had previously made this political analysis (11:49-50). John points out the irony of this statement. Jesus’ death did not bring Israel political salvation—it brought spiritual salvation to all who believe.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":42184,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42501,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69810,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70127,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97436,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97753,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125062,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125379,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19565,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20236,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38973,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Zebedee","title_en":"Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>ZEBEDEE<\/h3>\n<p>Father of the disciples James and John (Mt 26:37; Mk 3:17; 10:35). Zebedee was in the fishing business and may have been wealthy, considering that he had servants and apparent connections with the high priest (Jn 18:15). Although he personally appears only once in the narrative (Mt 4:21; Mk 1:19-20), his wife, Salome, appears frequently as one of the pious women who followed Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ZEBEDEE<\/h3>\n<p>Father of the disciples James and John (Mt 26:37; Mk 3:17; 10:35). Zebedee was in the fishing business and may have been wealthy, considering that he had servants and apparent connections with the high priest (Jn 18:15). Although he personally appears only once in the narrative (Mt 4:21; Mk 1:19-20), his wife, Salome, appears frequently as one of the pious women who followed Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ZEBEDEE Father of the disciples James and John (Mt 26:37; Mk 3:17; 10:35). Zebedee was in the fishing business and may have been wealthy, considering that he had servants and apparent connections with the high priest (Jn 18:15). Although he personally appears only once in the narrative (Mt 4:21; Mk 1:19-20), his wife, Salome, appears frequently as one of the pious women who followed Christ.","summary_en":"ZEBEDEE Father of the disciples James and John (Mt 26:37; Mk 3:17; 10:35). Zebedee was in the fishing business and may have been wealthy, considering that he had servants and apparent connections with the high priest (Jn 18:15). Although he personally appears only once in the narrative (Mt 4:21; Mk 1:19-20), his wife, Salome, appears frequently as one of the pious women who followed Christ.","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56714,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>That other disciple<\/em> is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>That other disciple<\/em> is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15 That other disciple is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.","summary_en":"18:15 That other disciple is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84340,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>That other disciple<\/em> is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>That other disciple<\/em> is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15 That other disciple is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.","summary_en":"18:15 That other disciple is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111966,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>That other disciple<\/em> is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>That other disciple<\/em> is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15 That other disciple is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.","summary_en":"18:15 That other disciple is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139592,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>That other disciple<\/em> is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>That other disciple<\/em> is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15 That other disciple is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.","summary_en":"18:15 That other disciple is unnamed but was probably the “disciple Jesus loved” (13:23)—John, the author of this Gospel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":56715,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:16-17<\/strong> During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), <em>the woman watching at the gate<\/em> asked <em>Peter<\/em> if he was <em>one of that man’s<\/em> <em>disciples<\/em>. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:16-17<\/strong> During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), <em>the woman watching at the gate<\/em> asked <em>Peter<\/em> if he was <em>one of that man’s<\/em> <em>disciples<\/em>. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:16-17 During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), the woman watching at the gate asked Peter if he was one of that man’s disciples. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).","summary_en":"18:16-17 During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), the woman watching at the gate asked Peter if he was one of that man’s disciples. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84341,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:16-17<\/strong> During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), <em>the woman watching at the gate<\/em> asked <em>Peter<\/em> if he was <em>one of that man’s<\/em> <em>disciples<\/em>. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:16-17<\/strong> During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), <em>the woman watching at the gate<\/em> asked <em>Peter<\/em> if he was <em>one of that man’s<\/em> <em>disciples<\/em>. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:16-17 During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), the woman watching at the gate asked Peter if he was one of that man’s disciples. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).","summary_en":"18:16-17 During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), the woman watching at the gate asked Peter if he was one of that man’s disciples. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111967,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:16-17<\/strong> During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), <em>the woman watching at the gate<\/em> asked <em>Peter<\/em> if he was <em>one of that man’s<\/em> <em>disciples<\/em>. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:16-17<\/strong> During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), <em>the woman watching at the gate<\/em> asked <em>Peter<\/em> if he was <em>one of that man’s<\/em> <em>disciples<\/em>. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:16-17 During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), the woman watching at the gate asked Peter if he was one of that man’s disciples. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).","summary_en":"18:16-17 During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), the woman watching at the gate asked Peter if he was one of that man’s disciples. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139593,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:16","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:16-17<\/strong> During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), <em>the woman watching at the gate<\/em> asked <em>Peter<\/em> if he was <em>one of that man’s<\/em> <em>disciples<\/em>. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:16-17<\/strong> During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), <em>the woman watching at the gate<\/em> asked <em>Peter<\/em> if he was <em>one of that man’s<\/em> <em>disciples<\/em>. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:16-17 During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), the woman watching at the gate asked Peter if he was one of that man’s disciples. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).","summary_en":"18:16-17 During Jesus’ interrogation by Annas (18:12-14, 19-24), the woman watching at the gate asked Peter if he was one of that man’s disciples. In contrast to Jesus, who stood up to his questioners and denied nothing, Peter quickly denied his link to Jesus three times (18:17, 25, 27).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":6968,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Coal","title_en":"Coal","content_ro":"<h3>COAL<\/h3>\n<p>Translation of several Hebrew or Greek words in the Bible referring primarily to charcoal (mineral coal is not found in Palestine). The glowing embers from a wood fire were used for heating (Is 47:14; Jn 18:18), cooking (Is 44:19; Jn 21:9), and by blacksmiths (Is 54:16). Coals from the altar were used in religious ritual (Lv 16:12; Is 6:6-7).<\/p>\n<p>Figuratively, the term is used in descriptions of God’s infinite brightness and glory (2 Sm 22:9, 13), of his revelation (Ps 18:8), of divine judgment (140:10) and of creatures associated with God’s throne (Ez 1:13; 10:2). In other metaphorical passages, glowing coals stand for life (2 Sm 14:7, <span>rsv<\/span>), the breath of a huge beast (“leviathan,” Jb 41:21), and the risk of being “burned” by sexual sin (Prv 6:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COAL<\/h3>\n<p>Translation of several Hebrew or Greek words in the Bible referring primarily to charcoal (mineral coal is not found in Palestine). The glowing embers from a wood fire were used for heating (Is 47:14; Jn 18:18), cooking (Is 44:19; Jn 21:9), and by blacksmiths (Is 54:16). Coals from the altar were used in religious ritual (Lv 16:12; Is 6:6-7).<\/p>\n<p>Figuratively, the term is used in descriptions of God’s infinite brightness and glory (2 Sm 22:9, 13), of his revelation (Ps 18:8), of divine judgment (140:10) and of creatures associated with God’s throne (Ez 1:13; 10:2). In other metaphorical passages, glowing coals stand for life (2 Sm 14:7, <span>rsv<\/span>), the breath of a huge beast (“leviathan,” Jb 41:21), and the risk of being “burned” by sexual sin (Prv 6:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"COAL Translation of several Hebrew or Greek words in the Bible referring primarily to charcoal (mineral coal is not found in Palestine). The glowing embers from a wood fire were used for heating (Is 47:14; Jn 18:18), cooking (Is 44:19; Jn 21:9), and by blacksmiths (Is 54:16). Coals from the altar were used in religious ritual (Lv 16:12; Is 6:6-7). Figuratively, the term is used in descriptions of God’s infinite brightness and glory (2 Sm 22:9, 13), of his revelation (Ps 18:8), of divine judgm...","summary_en":"COAL Translation of several Hebrew or Greek words in the Bible referring primarily to charcoal (mineral coal is not found in Palestine). The glowing embers from a wood fire were used for heating (Is 47:14; Jn 18:18), cooking (Is 44:19; Jn 21:9), and by blacksmiths (Is 54:16). Coals from the altar were used in religious ritual (Lv 16:12; Is 6:6-7). Figuratively, the term is used in descriptions of God’s infinite brightness and glory (2 Sm 22:9, 13), of his revelation (Ps 18:8), of divine judgm...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":2134,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Annas","title_en":"Annas","content_ro":"<h3>ANNAS<\/h3>\n<p>Jewish high priest from <span>AD<\/span> 7 to 15. Appointed by Quirinius, Roman governor of Syria, Annas was put out of office by Valerius Gratus, procurator of Judea. Annas was succeeded by three minor figures before the post was assumed by his son-in-law Caiaphas (Jn 18:13, 24). The tenure of Caiaphas extended from <span>AD<\/span> 18 to 36; thus, he was high priest at the time of Jesus’ public ministry.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently Annas’s power and influence remained considerable even after his removal from that office. Like an American Supreme Court justice, the high priest held a lifetime appointment. Deposition of a high priest by the pagan Romans would have been strongly resented by the Jews. Consequently, Annas may still have been referred to as high priest among the populace, as a sort of high priest emeritus. Such a practice, evidenced in the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus, tends to clear up those references in the NT to Annas as high priest during the same chronological period as Caiaphas (Lk 3:2; Jn 18:19, 22-24; Acts 4:6). The fact that Annas conducted a private inquiry of Jesus after he was arrested (Jn 18:13, 19-24) but before he was taken to Caiaphas, is a strong indication that Annas was still a person of considerable stature among the Jewish religious leaders.<\/p>\n<p>Annas is also mentioned in the NT account of an investigation of the apostles Peter and John. Interestingly, the penalty imposed on the apostles was far less severe than the one Jesus suffered (Acts 4:6-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANNAS<\/h3>\n<p>Jewish high priest from <span>AD<\/span> 7 to 15. Appointed by Quirinius, Roman governor of Syria, Annas was put out of office by Valerius Gratus, procurator of Judea. Annas was succeeded by three minor figures before the post was assumed by his son-in-law Caiaphas (Jn 18:13, 24). The tenure of Caiaphas extended from <span>AD<\/span> 18 to 36; thus, he was high priest at the time of Jesus’ public ministry.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently Annas’s power and influence remained considerable even after his removal from that office. Like an American Supreme Court justice, the high priest held a lifetime appointment. Deposition of a high priest by the pagan Romans would have been strongly resented by the Jews. Consequently, Annas may still have been referred to as high priest among the populace, as a sort of high priest emeritus. Such a practice, evidenced in the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus, tends to clear up those references in the NT to Annas as high priest during the same chronological period as Caiaphas (Lk 3:2; Jn 18:19, 22-24; Acts 4:6). The fact that Annas conducted a private inquiry of Jesus after he was arrested (Jn 18:13, 19-24) but before he was taken to Caiaphas, is a strong indication that Annas was still a person of considerable stature among the Jewish religious leaders.<\/p>\n<p>Annas is also mentioned in the NT account of an investigation of the apostles Peter and John. Interestingly, the penalty imposed on the apostles was far less severe than the one Jesus suffered (Acts 4:6-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANNAS Jewish high priest from AD 7 to 15. Appointed by Quirinius, Roman governor of Syria, Annas was put out of office by Valerius Gratus, procurator of Judea. Annas was succeeded by three minor figures before the post was assumed by his son-in-law Caiaphas (Jn 18:13, 24). The tenure of Caiaphas extended from AD 18 to 36; thus, he was high priest at the time of Jesus’ public ministry. Evidently Annas’s power and influence remained considerable even after his removal from that office. Like an ...","summary_en":"ANNAS Jewish high priest from AD 7 to 15. Appointed by Quirinius, Roman governor of Syria, Annas was put out of office by Valerius Gratus, procurator of Judea. Annas was succeeded by three minor figures before the post was assumed by his son-in-law Caiaphas (Jn 18:13, 24). The tenure of Caiaphas extended from AD 18 to 36; thus, he was high priest at the time of Jesus’ public ministry. Evidently Annas’s power and influence remained considerable even after his removal from that office. Like an ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28940,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Passion*","title_en":"Passion*","content_ro":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","summary_en":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56716,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> The <em>high priest began asking Jesus<\/em> questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gathering evidence through witnesses as Jewish law demanded.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> The <em>high priest began asking Jesus<\/em> questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gathering evidence through witnesses as Jewish law demanded.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:19 The high priest began asking Jesus questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gatherin...","summary_en":"18:19 The high priest began asking Jesus questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gatherin...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84342,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> The <em>high priest began asking Jesus<\/em> questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gathering evidence through witnesses as Jewish law demanded.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> The <em>high priest began asking Jesus<\/em> questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gathering evidence through witnesses as Jewish law demanded.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:19 The high priest began asking Jesus questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gatherin...","summary_en":"18:19 The high priest began asking Jesus questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gatherin...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111968,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> The <em>high priest began asking Jesus<\/em> questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gathering evidence through witnesses as Jewish law demanded.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> The <em>high priest began asking Jesus<\/em> questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gathering evidence through witnesses as Jewish law demanded.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:19 The high priest began asking Jesus questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gatherin...","summary_en":"18:19 The high priest began asking Jesus questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gatherin...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139594,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> The <em>high priest began asking Jesus<\/em> questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gathering evidence through witnesses as Jewish law demanded.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> The <em>high priest began asking Jesus<\/em> questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gathering evidence through witnesses as Jewish law demanded.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:19 The high priest began asking Jesus questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gatherin...","summary_en":"18:19 The high priest began asking Jesus questions, but his inquiry was contrary to Jewish legal procedure. In Jewish court, the priest did not ask questions directly of the defendant but accumulated evidence from witnesses to establish guilt (see Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; cp. Matt 18:16). If Jesus said anything incriminating, Annas would later use it to testify against him at Jesus’ trial. He was attempting to follow Roman practice by making Jesus incriminate himself, rather than gatherin...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":36518,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Synagogue","title_en":"Synagogue","content_ro":"<h3>SYNAGOGUE<\/h3>\n<p>Transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunagoge<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “a gathering together.” It is used more than 50 times in the NT, mostly for the religious gathering places of Jewish communities in Palestine and throughout the Dispersion. The word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunagoge<\/span> is usually the Greek rendering of Hebrew words in the OT that speak of the assembling or assembly of the people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginsandEarlyHistory\">Origins and Early History<\/p>\n<p>It is unknown just how or when the synagogue as an institution first began. One can imagine the situation in Jerusalem after the destruction of the temple by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. The people who remained in and around the city who wanted to keep true to their faith would have felt the need to meet for worship, where they would continue to teach the law and the message of the prophets. Some think, therefore, that synagogues may have had their origin in such a situation. Jewish people in the various places of the Dispersion would have been aware of a similar need. Jewish elders met together with Ezekiel in exile in Babylon (Ez 8:1; 14:1; 20:1). Yet there is no positive evidence of actual synagogues at this early stage. In Nehemiah 8:1-8 the postexilic community gathered in Jerusalem, and Ezra the scribe brought the law, read it from a wooden pulpit, and gave an interpretation so that the people understood the reading. When Ezra blessed the Lord, the people bowed their heads and worshiped. These were the basic elements of what came to be synagogue worship. The first undisputed evidence of a synagogue comes from Egypt in the third century <span>BC<\/span>. From the first century <span>BC<\/span> onward, the evidence of synagogues is abundant.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SynagoguesinNTTimes\">Synagogues in NT Times<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels give the impression of many synagogues existing throughout Palestine. Jesus frequently taught in synagogues (e.g., Mt 4:23; 9:35), especially during his Galilean ministry, but probably in Judea as well. In John 18:20 are the words of Jesus in his trial before the high priest: “I have spoken openly to the world; I have always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all Jews come together” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of the Apostles refers to synagogues in Jerusalem (Acts 6:9), Damascus (9:2), Cyprus (13:5), the Roman province of Galatia (13:14; 14:1), Macedonia and Greece (17:1, 10, 17; 18:4), and Ephesus in the Roman province of Asia (19:8). Paul made it his practice to go directly to the synagogue and to preach there as long as he was given freedom to do so.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SynagogueWorship\">Synagogue Worship<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles give abundant evidence for the meeting of Jewish people on the Sabbath to worship in the synagogue. People also met for worship on the second and fifth days of the week. Luke provides us with the earliest description of a synagogue service. The Mishnah describes the pattern of the synagogue service: the confession of faith, the Shema (which included reciting Deuteronomy 6:4-9; 11:13-21; and Numbers 15:37-41); prayer (such as the 18 Benedictions); Scripture reading (the reading of the Law was basic, see Acts 15:21, and was read according to a three-year cycle; the Prophets were also read, but more at random); interpretation (as the knowledge of biblical Hebrew diminished in Palestine, an Aramaic translation of the Scriptures was presented after the reading in Hebrew, and in the Dispersion, a Greek translation); address (following the reading, anyone suitably qualified might address the people, as Jesus and the apostle Paul often did); and blessing.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JudicialFunctions\">Judicial Functions<\/p>\n<p>Administration of justice was also part of the work of the synagogue. Offenders against the law and those whose actions were held to be contrary to Jewish religion were brought before the elders of the synagogue. They might, under extreme circumstances, excommunicate an offender (see Jn 9:22, 34-35; 12:42) or have him scourged. Jesus warned his disciples to be prepared to face either possibility (Mt 10:17; Jn 16:2). Saul, as persecutor of the Christians, had letters addressed to the synagogues at Damascus, giving authority to arrest Christians and bring them bound to Jerusalem (Acts 9:2). In Acts 22:19 he speaks of causing them to be both beaten and imprisoned. Paul himself received the 39 lashes that were administered in the synagogues (2 Cor 11:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingoftheLaw\">Teaching of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The reading of the Law was of central significance in synagogue worship. The teaching of the Law to people generally, and especially to children, was intimately associated with the synagogue. Either the synagogue building or a school was used.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Organization\">Organization<\/p>\n<p>The NT refers in particular (e.g., Mk 5:22; Lk 13:14; Acts 18:8,17) to two appointments in the synagogue: the “ruler of the synagogue,” who was responsible for order and for selection of the Scripture reader; and an attendant (Lk 4:20), who brought out and put away the Scripture scrolls and also administered corporal punishment to unruly students. Later on, there was a person appointed as leader of the prayers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Architecture\">Architecture<\/p>\n<p>In structure the synagogue was modeled after the temple. It was built, when possible, on high ground and often constructed so that the people could sit facing the direction of Jerusalem. There was a portable chest for the scrolls of the Law and the Prophets, and a platform for the reading of the Scriptures and for preaching. Men and women sat apart. The scribes loved the “chief seats” facing the people (Mk 12:39). Many synagogues had ornamentations of vine leaves, seven-branched candlesticks, the paschal lamb, and the pot of manna. Early synagogues also had a genizah, which was a cellar or attic where worn scrolls were put, because, as they bore the name of God, they were too sacred to be destroyed.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judaism; Ruler of the Synagogue.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SYNAGOGUE<\/h3>\n<p>Transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunagoge<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “a gathering together.” It is used more than 50 times in the NT, mostly for the religious gathering places of Jewish communities in Palestine and throughout the Dispersion. The word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunagoge<\/span> is usually the Greek rendering of Hebrew words in the OT that speak of the assembling or assembly of the people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginsandEarlyHistory\">Origins and Early History<\/p>\n<p>It is unknown just how or when the synagogue as an institution first began. One can imagine the situation in Jerusalem after the destruction of the temple by the Babylonians in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. The people who remained in and around the city who wanted to keep true to their faith would have felt the need to meet for worship, where they would continue to teach the law and the message of the prophets. Some think, therefore, that synagogues may have had their origin in such a situation. Jewish people in the various places of the Dispersion would have been aware of a similar need. Jewish elders met together with Ezekiel in exile in Babylon (Ez 8:1; 14:1; 20:1). Yet there is no positive evidence of actual synagogues at this early stage. In Nehemiah 8:1-8 the postexilic community gathered in Jerusalem, and Ezra the scribe brought the law, read it from a wooden pulpit, and gave an interpretation so that the people understood the reading. When Ezra blessed the Lord, the people bowed their heads and worshiped. These were the basic elements of what came to be synagogue worship. The first undisputed evidence of a synagogue comes from Egypt in the third century <span>BC<\/span>. From the first century <span>BC<\/span> onward, the evidence of synagogues is abundant.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SynagoguesinNTTimes\">Synagogues in NT Times<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels give the impression of many synagogues existing throughout Palestine. Jesus frequently taught in synagogues (e.g., Mt 4:23; 9:35), especially during his Galilean ministry, but probably in Judea as well. In John 18:20 are the words of Jesus in his trial before the high priest: “I have spoken openly to the world; I have always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all Jews come together” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of the Apostles refers to synagogues in Jerusalem (Acts 6:9), Damascus (9:2), Cyprus (13:5), the Roman province of Galatia (13:14; 14:1), Macedonia and Greece (17:1, 10, 17; 18:4), and Ephesus in the Roman province of Asia (19:8). Paul made it his practice to go directly to the synagogue and to preach there as long as he was given freedom to do so.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SynagogueWorship\">Synagogue Worship<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles give abundant evidence for the meeting of Jewish people on the Sabbath to worship in the synagogue. People also met for worship on the second and fifth days of the week. Luke provides us with the earliest description of a synagogue service. The Mishnah describes the pattern of the synagogue service: the confession of faith, the Shema (which included reciting Deuteronomy 6:4-9; 11:13-21; and Numbers 15:37-41); prayer (such as the 18 Benedictions); Scripture reading (the reading of the Law was basic, see Acts 15:21, and was read according to a three-year cycle; the Prophets were also read, but more at random); interpretation (as the knowledge of biblical Hebrew diminished in Palestine, an Aramaic translation of the Scriptures was presented after the reading in Hebrew, and in the Dispersion, a Greek translation); address (following the reading, anyone suitably qualified might address the people, as Jesus and the apostle Paul often did); and blessing.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JudicialFunctions\">Judicial Functions<\/p>\n<p>Administration of justice was also part of the work of the synagogue. Offenders against the law and those whose actions were held to be contrary to Jewish religion were brought before the elders of the synagogue. They might, under extreme circumstances, excommunicate an offender (see Jn 9:22, 34-35; 12:42) or have him scourged. Jesus warned his disciples to be prepared to face either possibility (Mt 10:17; Jn 16:2). Saul, as persecutor of the Christians, had letters addressed to the synagogues at Damascus, giving authority to arrest Christians and bring them bound to Jerusalem (Acts 9:2). In Acts 22:19 he speaks of causing them to be both beaten and imprisoned. Paul himself received the 39 lashes that were administered in the synagogues (2 Cor 11:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingoftheLaw\">Teaching of the Law<\/p>\n<p>The reading of the Law was of central significance in synagogue worship. The teaching of the Law to people generally, and especially to children, was intimately associated with the synagogue. Either the synagogue building or a school was used.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Organization\">Organization<\/p>\n<p>The NT refers in particular (e.g., Mk 5:22; Lk 13:14; Acts 18:8,17) to two appointments in the synagogue: the “ruler of the synagogue,” who was responsible for order and for selection of the Scripture reader; and an attendant (Lk 4:20), who brought out and put away the Scripture scrolls and also administered corporal punishment to unruly students. Later on, there was a person appointed as leader of the prayers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Architecture\">Architecture<\/p>\n<p>In structure the synagogue was modeled after the temple. It was built, when possible, on high ground and often constructed so that the people could sit facing the direction of Jerusalem. There was a portable chest for the scrolls of the Law and the Prophets, and a platform for the reading of the Scriptures and for preaching. Men and women sat apart. The scribes loved the “chief seats” facing the people (Mk 12:39). Many synagogues had ornamentations of vine leaves, seven-branched candlesticks, the paschal lamb, and the pot of manna. Early synagogues also had a genizah, which was a cellar or attic where worn scrolls were put, because, as they bore the name of God, they were too sacred to be destroyed.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judaism; Ruler of the Synagogue.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SYNAGOGUE Transliteration of the Greek word sunagoge, meaning “a gathering together.” It is used more than 50 times in the NT, mostly for the religious gathering places of Jewish communities in Palestine and throughout the Dispersion. The word sunagoge is usually the Greek rendering of Hebrew words in the OT that speak of the assembling or assembly of the people. Origins and Early History It is unknown just how or when the synagogue as an institution first began. One can imagine the situation...","summary_en":"SYNAGOGUE Transliteration of the Greek word sunagoge, meaning “a gathering together.” It is used more than 50 times in the NT, mostly for the religious gathering places of Jewish communities in Palestine and throughout the Dispersion. The word sunagoge is usually the Greek rendering of Hebrew words in the OT that speak of the assembling or assembly of the people. Origins and Early History It is unknown just how or when the synagogue as an institution first began. One can imagine the situation...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56717,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:20-21<\/strong> Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:20-21<\/strong> Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:20-21 Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.","summary_en":"18:20-21 Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84343,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:20-21<\/strong> Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:20-21<\/strong> Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:20-21 Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.","summary_en":"18:20-21 Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111969,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:20-21<\/strong> Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:20-21<\/strong> Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:20-21 Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.","summary_en":"18:20-21 Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139595,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:20-21<\/strong> Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:20-21<\/strong> Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:20-21 Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.","summary_en":"18:20-21 Jesus’ sharp answer, reminding Annas that everything was in the public record, unmasked the priest’s attempt to follow Roman practice.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":5930,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Caiaphas","title_en":"Caiaphas","content_ro":"<h3>CAIAPHAS<\/h3>\n<p>High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the time. The activities of the Zealots were increasing and were destined to break out soon into open revolt.<\/p>\n<p>A huge stir among the people, caused by the raising of Lazarus (Jn 11), brought matters to a head. Alarmed lest the activities of those seeking a political messiah should lead the Romans to intervene with armed force, Caiaphas advised that Jesus should be put to death (Jn 11:48-50). The Gospel writer John pointed out that, in so doing, Caiaphas unwittingly prophesied concerning the atoning nature of Jesus’ death (Jn 11:51-52).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas played a chief role in Jesus’ arrest and trial. The leaders laid their plans in his palace (Mt 26:3-5); it was there also that part of Jesus’ preliminary trial took place with Caiaphas presiding (vv 57-68). That was after Jesus had first been taken before Annas, Caiaphas’s father-in-law (Jn 18:13). Matthew, Mark, and Luke omit the visit to Annas, and Mark and Luke do not refer to Caiaphas by name. Upon Jesus’ admission that he was “the Christ, the Son of God,” Caiaphas tore his robes and charged him with blasphemy (Mt 26:63-66). After Pentecost, he, along with other Jewish leaders, presided over the trial of Peter and John when the council attempted to stop the preaching of the apostles (Acts 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Annas, who had held the office of high priest before Caiaphas, remained influential in the affairs of the nation. That explains why Luke, in his Gospel, set the ministry of John the Baptist “in the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas” (Lk 3:2), and in Acts called Annas the high priest (Acts 4:6). John’s account of Jesus’ visit to Annas makes plain that Annas was still popularly referred to as “high priest” (Jn 18:22).<\/p>\n<p>The historian Josephus records that Caiaphas was appointed to his office about <span>AD<\/span> 18 and ruled until he was deposed about <span>AD<\/span> 36. The high priest held office at the whim of the Romans, so Caiaphas’s unusually long term indicates that he was a man of considerable political skill. Caiaphas was removed from his position by the proconsul Vitellus, and nothing more is known of him.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CAIAPHAS<\/h3>\n<p>High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the time. The activities of the Zealots were increasing and were destined to break out soon into open revolt.<\/p>\n<p>A huge stir among the people, caused by the raising of Lazarus (Jn 11), brought matters to a head. Alarmed lest the activities of those seeking a political messiah should lead the Romans to intervene with armed force, Caiaphas advised that Jesus should be put to death (Jn 11:48-50). The Gospel writer John pointed out that, in so doing, Caiaphas unwittingly prophesied concerning the atoning nature of Jesus’ death (Jn 11:51-52).<\/p>\n<p>Caiaphas played a chief role in Jesus’ arrest and trial. The leaders laid their plans in his palace (Mt 26:3-5); it was there also that part of Jesus’ preliminary trial took place with Caiaphas presiding (vv 57-68). That was after Jesus had first been taken before Annas, Caiaphas’s father-in-law (Jn 18:13). Matthew, Mark, and Luke omit the visit to Annas, and Mark and Luke do not refer to Caiaphas by name. Upon Jesus’ admission that he was “the Christ, the Son of God,” Caiaphas tore his robes and charged him with blasphemy (Mt 26:63-66). After Pentecost, he, along with other Jewish leaders, presided over the trial of Peter and John when the council attempted to stop the preaching of the apostles (Acts 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Annas, who had held the office of high priest before Caiaphas, remained influential in the affairs of the nation. That explains why Luke, in his Gospel, set the ministry of John the Baptist “in the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas” (Lk 3:2), and in Acts called Annas the high priest (Acts 4:6). John’s account of Jesus’ visit to Annas makes plain that Annas was still popularly referred to as “high priest” (Jn 18:22).<\/p>\n<p>The historian Josephus records that Caiaphas was appointed to his office about <span>AD<\/span> 18 and ruled until he was deposed about <span>AD<\/span> 36. The high priest held office at the whim of the Romans, so Caiaphas’s unusually long term indicates that he was a man of considerable political skill. Caiaphas was removed from his position by the proconsul Vitellus, and nothing more is known of him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CAIAPHAS High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the tim...","summary_en":"CAIAPHAS High priest during the life and ministry of Jesus. As official head of the Jewish state, Caiaphas presided over the council, or Sanhedrin—its highest court. Next to the Roman governor, he was the most powerful man in Judea and was responsible to the Romans for the conduct of the nation. Caiaphas was, therefore, especially concerned about the popular enthusiasm and political unrest centering on the ministry of Jesus and about its implications for the revolutionary sentiment of the tim...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56718,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:22-23<\/strong> When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the <em>Temple guards<\/em> viewed it as insolence and <em>slapped Jesus<\/em>. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:22-23<\/strong> When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the <em>Temple guards<\/em> viewed it as insolence and <em>slapped Jesus<\/em>. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:22-23 When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the Temple guards viewed it as insolence and slapped Jesus. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.","summary_en":"18:22-23 When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the Temple guards viewed it as insolence and slapped Jesus. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84344,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:22-23<\/strong> When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the <em>Temple guards<\/em> viewed it as insolence and <em>slapped Jesus<\/em>. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:22-23<\/strong> When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the <em>Temple guards<\/em> viewed it as insolence and <em>slapped Jesus<\/em>. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:22-23 When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the Temple guards viewed it as insolence and slapped Jesus. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.","summary_en":"18:22-23 When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the Temple guards viewed it as insolence and slapped Jesus. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111970,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:22-23<\/strong> When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the <em>Temple guards<\/em> viewed it as insolence and <em>slapped Jesus<\/em>. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:22-23<\/strong> When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the <em>Temple guards<\/em> viewed it as insolence and <em>slapped Jesus<\/em>. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:22-23 When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the Temple guards viewed it as insolence and slapped Jesus. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.","summary_en":"18:22-23 When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the Temple guards viewed it as insolence and slapped Jesus. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139596,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:22","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:22-23<\/strong> When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the <em>Temple guards<\/em> viewed it as insolence and <em>slapped Jesus<\/em>. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:22-23<\/strong> When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the <em>Temple guards<\/em> viewed it as insolence and <em>slapped Jesus<\/em>. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:22-23 When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the Temple guards viewed it as insolence and slapped Jesus. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.","summary_en":"18:22-23 When Jesus reminded Annas of correct judicial procedure, one of the Temple guards viewed it as insolence and slapped Jesus. However, Jesus knew the law and represented it truthfully. No witnesses were accusing him, and no evidence was being presented.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":28941,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Passion*","title_en":"Passion*","content_ro":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PASSION*<\/h3>\n<p>A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (<span>kjv<\/span> and <span>rsv<\/span>) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNatureofthePassion\">The Nature of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Mark in chapters 14–15, Luke in chapters 22–23, and John in chapters 18–19.<\/p>\n<p>On the physical side of his Passion, Luke describes most graphically the agony Jesus experienced while at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:41-44). John (Jn 18:12) tells us that Jesus was then bound and led to the high priest’s house, where he was first interrogated by Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, current holder of that office. This interrogation is recorded in John 18:19-24.<\/p>\n<p>Annas sent Jesus on to Caiaphas for further examination (Jn 18:24). At this stage the soldiers guarding Jesus indulged in some foul play—beating him and asking him (when blindfolded) to prophesy who had hit him (Lk 22:63-65). At daybreak the Sanhedrin, or Jewish Council, assembled and attempted to convict him but could not obtain consistent evidence against him.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the high priest asked him a question that led him to incriminate himself (in their eyes)—a procedure that was quite contrary to Jewish law (Mk 14:55-64). By putting a direct question concerning Jesus’ messiahship, they compelled him to commit what they regarded as blasphemy, for they had closed their minds to the possibility that this could in fact be true.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 26:67-68 and Mark 14:65 suggest that it was at this point that Jesus was ill-treated by his guards and possibly some members of the council. He was then taken under arrest to Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem, the Praetorium or garrison headquarters. Pilate appears to have conducted a preliminary examination of Jesus, and when he found that his hometown was in Galilee, sent Jesus to Herod as being under the latter’s jurisdiction. Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions, and so the Jewish tetrarch sent Jesus back to the governor—after mocking Jesus (Lk 23:1-12). Pilate then appears to have wanted to enlist the crowd’s sympathy for Jesus and so had him scourged, after which he was dressed in a purple robe (possibly the one given him by Herod; Lk 23:11) and a crown of thorns. The scourging could have been the regular prelude to crucifixion, or it may have been an attempt to suggest that he had punished Jesus enough (v 16). It was inflicted by the flagellum (Mk 15:15)—a leather whip whose thongs were weighted with jagged pieces of bone and lead—while the victim’s hands were tied to a pillar. Even after this, Jesus faced more buffeting by the soldiers (Mt 27:27-31; Mk 15:16-20; Jn 19:3) and then had to stand by while Pilate tried weakly to negotiate with the mob, who by now had been stirred up by his opponents to clamor for Jesus’ death (Jn 19:1-16; cf. Mt 27:11-26; Mk 15:1-15; Lk 23:18-25). All was in vain, and Pilate handed him over to the execution squad. It is not surprising that after all this ill-treatment, Jesus appears to have been unable to carry the cross (either the cross piece only or the whole of this instrument of execution) to Calvary, and so Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying it for him (see Mk 15:21 and parallels). Once this grim destination was reached, the soldiers lost little time in nailing him to the cross. Traditionally, this was done by driving a nail through each hand and a longer nail through both feet together. The cross was then set upright into a socket in the ground (or the cross piece hauled up on the piece already standing upright), and Jesus was left to hang there until he expired from loss of blood after the scourging (which in itself sometimes proved fatal) or from a ruptured heart caused by the strain on the muscles of the diaphragm.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from the physical side of the Passion, we must not forget that Jesus also experienced the mental agony of being betrayed by his friends and forsaken by his followers. There was the further suffering of knowing that all he went through was totally undeserved, him being completely innocent of all the charges trumped up against him. The Jews prided themselves on the quality of their religion, and the Romans on the standards of their law, and yet it was paradoxically the misunderstanding of Jewish religion and the misuse of Roman law that enabled his enemies to hound him to the cross.<\/p>\n<p>Most of all, there was the spiritual suffering of knowing that he was going to be “made sin, who knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21) and consequently separated from God. This was why Jesus, at a moment when many martyrs have known the presence and reality of God in a marked degree, uttered his stark cry of dereliction—“My God, my God, why have you deserted me?” (Mk 15:34 and parallels).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUniquenessofthePassion\">The Uniqueness of the Passion<\/p>\n<p>It is evident from the pages of the NT that the “good news” with which the first Christians turned the ancient world upside down was that “Christ died for our sins just as the Scriptures said he would, and that he was buried, and that three days afterwards he arose from the grave just as the prophets foretold” (1 Cor 15:3, <span>tlb<\/span>). This was the basic message of Peter (Acts 2:22-36; 3:12-21; 10:36-43; 1 Pt 2:24; 3:18) and Paul (Acts 13:26-39) and is also central to the thinking of John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10 and Rv 1:5; 5:9) and the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 2:9, 17; 9:28; 10:12). The fact that Jesus was sinless qualified him to bear the sins of the whole world and thus achieve what no human being has ever been able, or will ever be able, to do: bear the consequences of, and punishment for, human sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","summary_en":"PASSION* A derivative from Latin meaning “suffering.” It is used in some translations (kjv and rsv) in Acts 1:3 to refer to the sufferings of Jesus. Throughout the centuries Christians have referred to Jesus’ sufferings as his Passion. The Nature of the Passion Each of the four Gospels has what is called a Passion narrative, which is the section recording the sufferings of Jesus on the night of his arrest and the following day leading up to his death. Matthew includes it in chapters 26–27, Ma...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56719,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:24","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>Annas<\/em> was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent <em>Jesus<\/em> to <em>Caiaphas<\/em> to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>Annas<\/em> was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent <em>Jesus<\/em> to <em>Caiaphas<\/em> to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:24 Annas was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent Jesus to Caiaphas to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).","summary_en":"18:24 Annas was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent Jesus to Caiaphas to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84345,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:24","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>Annas<\/em> was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent <em>Jesus<\/em> to <em>Caiaphas<\/em> to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>Annas<\/em> was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent <em>Jesus<\/em> to <em>Caiaphas<\/em> to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:24 Annas was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent Jesus to Caiaphas to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).","summary_en":"18:24 Annas was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent Jesus to Caiaphas to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111971,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:24","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>Annas<\/em> was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent <em>Jesus<\/em> to <em>Caiaphas<\/em> to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>Annas<\/em> was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent <em>Jesus<\/em> to <em>Caiaphas<\/em> to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:24 Annas was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent Jesus to Caiaphas to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).","summary_en":"18:24 Annas was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent Jesus to Caiaphas to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139597,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:24","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>Annas<\/em> was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent <em>Jesus<\/em> to <em>Caiaphas<\/em> to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>Annas<\/em> was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent <em>Jesus<\/em> to <em>Caiaphas<\/em> to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:24 Annas was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent Jesus to Caiaphas to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).","summary_en":"18:24 Annas was at an impasse—his probing had been unsuccessful. So he sent Jesus to Caiaphas to be prosecuted before the Sanhedrin, Jerusalem’s judicial high council (see Mark 14:53–15:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"25":[{"id":42185,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69811,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97437,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125063,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56720,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:25","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:25","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:25-27<\/strong> <em>He denied it:<\/em> Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:25-27<\/strong> <em>He denied it:<\/em> Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:25-27 He denied it: Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).","summary_en":"18:25-27 He denied it: Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84346,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:25","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:25","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:25-27<\/strong> <em>He denied it:<\/em> Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:25-27<\/strong> <em>He denied it:<\/em> Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:25-27 He denied it: Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).","summary_en":"18:25-27 He denied it: Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111972,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:25","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:25","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:25-27<\/strong> <em>He denied it:<\/em> Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:25-27<\/strong> <em>He denied it:<\/em> Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:25-27 He denied it: Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).","summary_en":"18:25-27 He denied it: Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139598,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:25","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:25","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:25-27<\/strong> <em>He denied it:<\/em> Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:25-27<\/strong> <em>He denied it:<\/em> Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:25-27 He denied it: Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).","summary_en":"18:25-27 He denied it: Peter’s three denials were later echoed when Jesus invited him three times to reaffirm his love (21:15-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":42296,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Pontius Pilate","title_en":"Pontius Pilate","content_ro":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","summary_en":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42465,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jewish Leaders","title_en":"Jewish Leaders","content_ro":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","summary_en":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69922,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Pontius Pilate","title_en":"Pontius Pilate","content_ro":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","summary_en":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70091,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jewish Leaders","title_en":"Jewish Leaders","content_ro":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","summary_en":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97548,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Pontius Pilate","title_en":"Pontius Pilate","content_ro":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","summary_en":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97717,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jewish Leaders","title_en":"Jewish Leaders","content_ro":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","summary_en":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125174,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Pontius Pilate","title_en":"Pontius Pilate","content_ro":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","summary_en":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125343,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jewish Leaders","title_en":"Jewish Leaders","content_ro":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jewish Leaders<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him.<\/p>\n<p>When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Acts 14:19; 1 Thes 2:14; cp. Gal 1:13-14). The Greek term translated “Jewish leaders” could be literally translated as “Jews.” But the word took on this technical meaning to refer to the Temple leadership who confronted Jesus, judged him, and orchestrated his crucifixion (see John 1:19; 2:18; 5:9-18; 9:18-22). This is important because the New Testament—particularly John’s Gospel—has often been seen as anti-Semitic. But the truth is that Jesus, who was himself a Jew, did not wrestle with “Jews” in general. His antagonists were the “Jewish leaders”—the brokers of religious power in first-century Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 1:19-24; 2:18-20; 5:9-18; 7:1, 10-13, 35-36; 9:13-34; 11:45-54; 12:41-43; 18:28-36; 19:6-8, 12-16, 31, 38; 20:19; Acts 6:10-12; 7:54-58; 12:11; 21:11; 25:1-3, 7; 26:1-11; 28:17-24; 2 Corinthians 11:24<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","summary_en":"Jewish Leaders Jesus experienced numerous conflicts with Jewish leaders throughout his public ministry. These opponents viewed themselves as defending the Temple and its sacrifices or the synagogue and its teachings. In Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, these debates intensified (see Matt 23) and contributed to the case against him. When John wrote his Gospel, Christians were being persecuted by local Jewish synagogues, and the language of those conflicts spilled over into John’s Gospel (see Ac...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19573,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21378,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Judgment*, Hall","title_en":"of Judgment*, Hall","content_ro":"<h3>JUDGMENT*, Hall of<\/h3>\n<p>KJV translation in Jn 18:28, 33; 19:9; Acts 23:35 of a NT word also translated “Praetorium” (Mk 15:16) and “common hall” (Mt 27:27). The word was first used to refer to the place where the Roman general’s tent stood in an army camp and hence was a reference to the headquarters of the camp. It then came to mean the military council that met in the general’s tent. Later, it was used in reference to the palace in which the Roman governor or procurator resided while ruling a province. It also designated the army headquarters and barracks that were housed in connection with the governor’s residence. In Jerusalem it was the palace that Herod the Great had built for himself. When the Roman governor came from his normal residence in Caesarea to Jerusalem, he occupied Herod’s palace and conducted his official business there. It was there that Pilate questioned Jesus (Jn 18:28; 19:9), but it was at another place called the “Pavement” that Pilate sat in judgment and gave Jesus to the Jews.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUDGMENT*, Hall of<\/h3>\n<p>KJV translation in Jn 18:28, 33; 19:9; Acts 23:35 of a NT word also translated “Praetorium” (Mk 15:16) and “common hall” (Mt 27:27). The word was first used to refer to the place where the Roman general’s tent stood in an army camp and hence was a reference to the headquarters of the camp. It then came to mean the military council that met in the general’s tent. Later, it was used in reference to the palace in which the Roman governor or procurator resided while ruling a province. It also designated the army headquarters and barracks that were housed in connection with the governor’s residence. In Jerusalem it was the palace that Herod the Great had built for himself. When the Roman governor came from his normal residence in Caesarea to Jerusalem, he occupied Herod’s palace and conducted his official business there. It was there that Pilate questioned Jesus (Jn 18:28; 19:9), but it was at another place called the “Pavement” that Pilate sat in judgment and gave Jesus to the Jews.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUDGMENT*, Hall of KJV translation in Jn 18:28, 33; 19:9; Acts 23:35 of a NT word also translated “Praetorium” (Mk 15:16) and “common hall” (Mt 27:27). The word was first used to refer to the place where the Roman general’s tent stood in an army camp and hence was a reference to the headquarters of the camp. It then came to mean the military council that met in the general’s tent. Later, it was used in reference to the palace in which the Roman governor or procurator resided while ruling a pr...","summary_en":"JUDGMENT*, Hall of KJV translation in Jn 18:28, 33; 19:9; Acts 23:35 of a NT word also translated “Praetorium” (Mk 15:16) and “common hall” (Mt 27:27). The word was first used to refer to the place where the Roman general’s tent stood in an army camp and hence was a reference to the headquarters of the camp. It then came to mean the military council that met in the general’s tent. Later, it was used in reference to the palace in which the Roman governor or procurator resided while ruling a pr...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23488,"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>\n<p>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 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>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The 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>\n<p>In 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>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All 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, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various 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” (<span>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>\n<p>Thus, 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, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The 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>\n<p>The 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>\n<p>This 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>\n<p>It 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>\n<p>Jesus 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>\n<p>The 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>\n<p>All 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” (<span>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” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In 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” (<span>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, <span>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>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In 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>\n<p>To 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, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/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>\n<p>Of 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, <span>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>\n<p>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 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>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The 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>\n<p>In 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>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All 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, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various 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” (<span>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>\n<p>Thus, 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, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The 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>\n<p>The 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>\n<p>This 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>\n<p>It 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>\n<p>Jesus 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>\n<p>The 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>\n<p>All 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” (<span>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” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In 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” (<span>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, <span>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>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In 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>\n<p>To 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, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/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>\n<p>Of 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, <span>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":31062,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Guard* Praetorium*, Praetorian","title_en":"Guard* Praetorium*, Praetorian","content_ro":"<h3>PRAETORIUM*, PRAETORIAN GUARD*<\/h3>\n<p>Term appearing in the Greek NT in Mark 15:16; Matthew 27:27; John 18:28, 33; 19:9; Acts 23:35; and Philippians 1:13. It is a Latin word borrowed from the Romans, who dominated the Mediterranean world in NT times. It was used primarily in military and governmental affairs. Originally it designated the tent of the general <em>(praetor)<\/em> in a military encampment. The meaning was extended to include the residence of a governor or other Roman official, as, for example, that of Pontius Pilate, the procurator of Judea. In looser usage the term may also have referred to a part of the residence—for instance, the barracks of the soldiers.<\/p>\n<p>In English translations of the NT, the variety of terms used by translators indicates the uncertainty about the specific reference. The general reference to the headquarters of the Roman representative and military force is clear, however. According to the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, the praetorium was the location of the Roman soldiers’ mocking of Jesus after his appearance before Pilate. Mark also calls this place a “palace” (<span>rsv<\/span>) or “courtyard” (<span>neb<\/span>, <span>tev<\/span>). According to the Gospel of John, the “praetorium” was the place within which Pilate examined Jesus about the charges brought against him. He went outside the praetorium to meet with the accusers who brought the charges.<\/p>\n<p>Within Jerusalem, two locations are possible for Pilate’s headquarters. One is the fortress known as the Tower of Antonia at the northwest corner of the temple area. The other is the old palace of Herod the Great, in the western part of the city. Either one could have served as the praetorium, but the Gospel sources identify neither by name or description.<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 23:35, on the other hand, the praetorium in which Paul is held in Caesarea (pending the arrival of his accusers) is called “Herod’s praetorium.” This probably means that the procurator Felix (and his predecessors) had taken over the old official residence of King Herod as their coastal headquarters.<\/p>\n<p>The location of Paul’s imprisonment at the time he wrote to the Philippians is not clear. His mention of the “praetorium” in Philippians 1:13 suggests some center of Roman government. The phrase “the whole praetorium,” however, indicates that in this context he was referring to the personnel rather than to a building or a place. Recent translations reflect this meaning: “the whole praetorian guard” (<span>rsv<\/span>); “all at headquarters” (<span>neb<\/span>); “all the soldiers in the palace guard” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PRAETORIUM*, PRAETORIAN GUARD*<\/h3>\n<p>Term appearing in the Greek NT in Mark 15:16; Matthew 27:27; John 18:28, 33; 19:9; Acts 23:35; and Philippians 1:13. It is a Latin word borrowed from the Romans, who dominated the Mediterranean world in NT times. It was used primarily in military and governmental affairs. Originally it designated the tent of the general <em>(praetor)<\/em> in a military encampment. The meaning was extended to include the residence of a governor or other Roman official, as, for example, that of Pontius Pilate, the procurator of Judea. In looser usage the term may also have referred to a part of the residence—for instance, the barracks of the soldiers.<\/p>\n<p>In English translations of the NT, the variety of terms used by translators indicates the uncertainty about the specific reference. The general reference to the headquarters of the Roman representative and military force is clear, however. According to the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, the praetorium was the location of the Roman soldiers’ mocking of Jesus after his appearance before Pilate. Mark also calls this place a “palace” (<span>rsv<\/span>) or “courtyard” (<span>neb<\/span>, <span>tev<\/span>). According to the Gospel of John, the “praetorium” was the place within which Pilate examined Jesus about the charges brought against him. He went outside the praetorium to meet with the accusers who brought the charges.<\/p>\n<p>Within Jerusalem, two locations are possible for Pilate’s headquarters. One is the fortress known as the Tower of Antonia at the northwest corner of the temple area. The other is the old palace of Herod the Great, in the western part of the city. Either one could have served as the praetorium, but the Gospel sources identify neither by name or description.<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 23:35, on the other hand, the praetorium in which Paul is held in Caesarea (pending the arrival of his accusers) is called “Herod’s praetorium.” This probably means that the procurator Felix (and his predecessors) had taken over the old official residence of King Herod as their coastal headquarters.<\/p>\n<p>The location of Paul’s imprisonment at the time he wrote to the Philippians is not clear. His mention of the “praetorium” in Philippians 1:13 suggests some center of Roman government. The phrase “the whole praetorium,” however, indicates that in this context he was referring to the personnel rather than to a building or a place. Recent translations reflect this meaning: “the whole praetorian guard” (<span>rsv<\/span>); “all at headquarters” (<span>neb<\/span>); “all the soldiers in the palace guard” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"PRAETORIUM*, PRAETORIAN GUARD* Term appearing in the Greek NT in Mark 15:16; Matthew 27:27; John 18:28, 33; 19:9; Acts 23:35; and Philippians 1:13. It is a Latin word borrowed from the Romans, who dominated the Mediterranean world in NT times. It was used primarily in military and governmental affairs. Originally it designated the tent of the general (praetor) in a military encampment. The meaning was extended to include the residence of a governor or other Roman official, as, for example, th...","summary_en":"PRAETORIUM*, PRAETORIAN GUARD* Term appearing in the Greek NT in Mark 15:16; Matthew 27:27; John 18:28, 33; 19:9; Acts 23:35; and Philippians 1:13. It is a Latin word borrowed from the Romans, who dominated the Mediterranean world in NT times. It was used primarily in military and governmental affairs. Originally it designated the tent of the general (praetor) in a military encampment. The meaning was extended to include the residence of a governor or other Roman official, as, for example, th...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56721,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:28","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:28","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:28<\/strong> The trial before <em>Caiaphas<\/em> ended <em>in the early hours of the morning<\/em>. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • <em>it would defile them:<\/em> They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The <em>Passover<\/em> meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The following day, another meal began the weeklong Festival of Unleavened Bread (Lev 23:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:28<\/strong> The trial before <em>Caiaphas<\/em> ended <em>in the early hours of the morning<\/em>. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • <em>it would defile them:<\/em> They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The <em>Passover<\/em> meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The following day, another meal began the weeklong Festival of Unleavened Bread (Lev 23:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:28 The trial before Caiaphas ended in the early hours of the morning. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • it would defile them: They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The Passover meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The fo...","summary_en":"18:28 The trial before Caiaphas ended in the early hours of the morning. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • it would defile them: They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The Passover meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The fo...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84347,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:28","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:28","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:28<\/strong> The trial before <em>Caiaphas<\/em> ended <em>in the early hours of the morning<\/em>. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • <em>it would defile them:<\/em> They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The <em>Passover<\/em> meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The following day, another meal began the weeklong Festival of Unleavened Bread (Lev 23:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:28<\/strong> The trial before <em>Caiaphas<\/em> ended <em>in the early hours of the morning<\/em>. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • <em>it would defile them:<\/em> They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The <em>Passover<\/em> meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The following day, another meal began the weeklong Festival of Unleavened Bread (Lev 23:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:28 The trial before Caiaphas ended in the early hours of the morning. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • it would defile them: They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The Passover meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The fo...","summary_en":"18:28 The trial before Caiaphas ended in the early hours of the morning. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • it would defile them: They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The Passover meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The fo...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111973,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:28","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:28","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:28<\/strong> The trial before <em>Caiaphas<\/em> ended <em>in the early hours of the morning<\/em>. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • <em>it would defile them:<\/em> They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The <em>Passover<\/em> meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The following day, another meal began the weeklong Festival of Unleavened Bread (Lev 23:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:28<\/strong> The trial before <em>Caiaphas<\/em> ended <em>in the early hours of the morning<\/em>. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • <em>it would defile them:<\/em> They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The <em>Passover<\/em> meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The following day, another meal began the weeklong Festival of Unleavened Bread (Lev 23:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:28 The trial before Caiaphas ended in the early hours of the morning. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • it would defile them: They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The Passover meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The fo...","summary_en":"18:28 The trial before Caiaphas ended in the early hours of the morning. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • it would defile them: They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The Passover meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The fo...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139599,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:28","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:28","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:28<\/strong> The trial before <em>Caiaphas<\/em> ended <em>in the early hours of the morning<\/em>. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • <em>it would defile them:<\/em> They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The <em>Passover<\/em> meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The following day, another meal began the weeklong Festival of Unleavened Bread (Lev 23:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:28<\/strong> The trial before <em>Caiaphas<\/em> ended <em>in the early hours of the morning<\/em>. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • <em>it would defile them:<\/em> They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The <em>Passover<\/em> meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The following day, another meal began the weeklong Festival of Unleavened Bread (Lev 23:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:28 The trial before Caiaphas ended in the early hours of the morning. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • it would defile them: They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The Passover meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The fo...","summary_en":"18:28 The trial before Caiaphas ended in the early hours of the morning. Since they did not have the power of capital punishment (18:31), the Sanhedrin needed to enlist Pilate, the Roman governor, to carry out an execution. • it would defile them: They did not want to become ritually unclean by contact with Gentiles in Pilate’s headquarters. So Pilate, probably fearing a riot, went outside to meet them. • The Passover meal itself had occurred the night before (see 13:1; Mark 14:14-16). The fo...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65552,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93178,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120804,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148430,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":21200,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Judge","title_en":"Judge","content_ro":"<h3>JUDGE<\/h3>\n<p>An official authorized to decide matters brought before a court. The judge undertook a variety of tasks, mostly in legal and judicial areas, but at times in political areas. In the patriarchal period the elders of the tribes decided disputes. Moses appointed other judges to assist him, taking only the difficult cases himself (Ex 18:13-26; Dt 1:9-17). Samuel went on circuit judging cases (1 Sm 7:16-17); his sons became judges too (8:1). During the monarchy period, the office of judge was well established.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT era two kinds of courts operated in Palestine, the Jewish and the Roman. Capital cases were tried before a Roman judge. Witnesses were produced at trials (Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tm 5:19). Jesus himself was tried before Pontius Pilate, the Roman procurator (Mt 27:11-25; Mk 15:2-5; Lk 23:2-3; Jn 18:29-40), and Paul before Felix (Acts 24:1-26) and Festus (25:1-26).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Criminal Law and Punishment.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUDGE<\/h3>\n<p>An official authorized to decide matters brought before a court. The judge undertook a variety of tasks, mostly in legal and judicial areas, but at times in political areas. In the patriarchal period the elders of the tribes decided disputes. Moses appointed other judges to assist him, taking only the difficult cases himself (Ex 18:13-26; Dt 1:9-17). Samuel went on circuit judging cases (1 Sm 7:16-17); his sons became judges too (8:1). During the monarchy period, the office of judge was well established.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT era two kinds of courts operated in Palestine, the Jewish and the Roman. Capital cases were tried before a Roman judge. Witnesses were produced at trials (Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tm 5:19). Jesus himself was tried before Pontius Pilate, the Roman procurator (Mt 27:11-25; Mk 15:2-5; Lk 23:2-3; Jn 18:29-40), and Paul before Felix (Acts 24:1-26) and Festus (25:1-26).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Criminal Law and Punishment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUDGE An official authorized to decide matters brought before a court. The judge undertook a variety of tasks, mostly in legal and judicial areas, but at times in political areas. In the patriarchal period the elders of the tribes decided disputes. Moses appointed other judges to assist him, taking only the difficult cases himself (Ex 18:13-26; Dt 1:9-17). Samuel went on circuit judging cases (1 Sm 7:16-17); his sons became judges too (8:1). During the monarchy period, the office of judge was...","summary_en":"JUDGE An official authorized to decide matters brought before a court. The judge undertook a variety of tasks, mostly in legal and judicial areas, but at times in political areas. In the patriarchal period the elders of the tribes decided disputes. Moses appointed other judges to assist him, taking only the difficult cases himself (Ex 18:13-26; Dt 1:9-17). Samuel went on circuit judging cases (1 Sm 7:16-17); his sons became judges too (8:1). During the monarchy period, the office of judge was...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30390,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Pontius Pilate","title_en":"Pontius Pilate","content_ro":"<h3>PILATE, P<span>ontius<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Appointed by Tiberius as the fifth prefect of Judea, Pilate served in that capacity from <span>AD<\/span> 26–36. He appears prominently in the trial narratives of the Gospels as the Roman governor who authorized Jesus’ crucifixion. In addition, he appears in a variety of extrabiblical sources as a dispassionate administrator who relentlessly pursued Roman authority in Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Tacitus (<em>Annals<\/em> 15.44) mentions Pilate in connection with the crucifixion of Jesus but adds little to the Gospel account. Josephus, on the other hand, provides three narratives. First, he describes Pilate’s arrival as the new prefect (<em>War<\/em> 2.9.2; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.1; cf. Eusebius’s <em>Histories<\/em> 2.6). Offending Jewish law, Pilate brought ensigns into Jerusalem that bore the image of Caesar. A large gathering of Jews then came to Caesarea in protest, fasting there for five days. Pilate called in troops to dismiss them, but he learned his first lesson about Jewish intransigence. The Jews were ready to die rather than tolerate the ensigns. Soon thereafter Pilate relented.<\/p>\n<p>A second incident occurred when Pilate appropriated temple funds in order to construct a 35-mile (56.3-kilometer) aqueduct for Jerusalem (<em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Again, there was a major protest. Pilate ordered his soldiers to dress in tunics and infiltrate the crowds in disguise. At his command, the troops used clubs to beat the offenders. Many Jews were killed. Josephus records the horror with which Jerusalem perceived the affair.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, Josephus records the story of Pilate’s dismissal (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.4.1-2). In <span>AD<\/span> 36 a Samaritan false prophet (pretending to be the <em>Taheb,<\/em> or Samaritan messiah) promised to show his followers sacred vessels hidden by Moses on Mt Gerizim. Pilate sent a heavily armed contingent of footmen and cavalry who intercepted the pilgrims and slaughtered most of them. The Samaritans complained to Vitellius, the prefect of Syria, whereupon Pilate was ordered to report to the emperor Tiberius. Another prefect, Marcellus, was then sent by Rome as Pilate’s replacement.<\/p>\n<p>Philo records yet another event (<em>Leg. to Caius<\/em> 299-305). While extolling the liberal policies of Tiberius toward Judaism, he cites a negative example in Pontius Pilate. The prefect had erected gilded shields in Herod’s former palace in Jerusalem that bore the name of the emperor. Refusing to hear Jewish complaints, the sons of Herod appealed to Tiberius, who ordered Pilate to transfer the shields to the temple of Augustus in Caesarea. The similarities with the parallel story in Josephus have led many scholars to believe that Philo is merely recounting another version of the same event.<\/p>\n<p>Luke mentions a minor incident that contributes to this same portrait. In Luke 13:1 some Jews tell Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. While this story is not corroborated by any other witness, it conforms to the impressions of Pilate’s character given by Philo and Josephus. In fact, Luke adds another detail of interest in his trial narrative. In Luke 23:12 he says that prior to the crucifixion of Jesus, Herod Antipas (in Galilee) and Pilate had been at enmity with each other. This may have stemmed not simply from Pilate’s usual antagonism but particularly from the Galilean incident.<\/p>\n<p>Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus is recorded in each Gospel (Mt 27:2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:29) and was remembered as a historical datum in the preaching of the apostles (Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tm 6:13). In order to secure the conviction and death of Jesus, Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin brought their charges to Pilate. While the accusations took on a political flavor to evoke the governor’s interest, he still could find no grounds for condemnation. In the end, Pilate unexpectedly accommodates the Jewish leaders and has Jesus crucified.<\/p>\n<p>All of the Gospels and particularly John show Pilate’s repeated verdict of Jesus’ innocence. According to Matthew 27:19, Pilate’s wife had an ominous dream about Jesus’ conviction, and she warned her husband. Pilate tried to have Jesus released, but the crowd cried for Barabbas. Matthew even records that Pilate washed his hands (27:24-25), declaring his own innocence in this. And finally, John says that Pilate refused to alter the title over the cross (Jn 19:19-22). These accounts, therefore, take the full blame for Jesus’ death from Pilate and place it on the Jewish leaders of the Sanhedrin. They are ultimately responsible.<\/p>\n<p>But why would Pilate act in behalf of the Sanhedrin? Two answers are possible. First, there may have been collusion between Caiaphas and Pilate that stemmed from a long-standing relationship and coterminous reign. Ten of Caiaphas’s eighteen years in power were under Pilate, and when the prefect was dismissed in <span>AD<\/span> 36, Caiaphas was simultaneously removed. Second, if Jesus’ trial occurred in <span>AD<\/span> 33, Pilate may have been concerned about his impeachment. He had originally been appointed by Sejanus (prefect of the praetorians in Rome who had appointed men to colonial office under Tiberius), but in the autumn of <span>AD<\/span> 31 Sejanus died. This explains why a Jewish delegation could report directly to Tiberius during the votive shield incident. Hence, the charge recorded in John 19:12 (“If you release this man, you are not Caesar’s friend”) would have had genuine power over Pilate. Pilate perceived his jeopardy and was anxious to pacify the Jews and please the emperor.<\/p>\n<p>The history of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36 is unknown. Eusebius reports that Pilate ultimately committed suicide during the reign of the emperor Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (<em>History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PILATE, P<span>ontius<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Appointed by Tiberius as the fifth prefect of Judea, Pilate served in that capacity from <span>AD<\/span> 26–36. He appears prominently in the trial narratives of the Gospels as the Roman governor who authorized Jesus’ crucifixion. In addition, he appears in a variety of extrabiblical sources as a dispassionate administrator who relentlessly pursued Roman authority in Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Tacitus (<em>Annals<\/em> 15.44) mentions Pilate in connection with the crucifixion of Jesus but adds little to the Gospel account. Josephus, on the other hand, provides three narratives. First, he describes Pilate’s arrival as the new prefect (<em>War<\/em> 2.9.2; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.1; cf. Eusebius’s <em>Histories<\/em> 2.6). Offending Jewish law, Pilate brought ensigns into Jerusalem that bore the image of Caesar. A large gathering of Jews then came to Caesarea in protest, fasting there for five days. Pilate called in troops to dismiss them, but he learned his first lesson about Jewish intransigence. The Jews were ready to die rather than tolerate the ensigns. Soon thereafter Pilate relented.<\/p>\n<p>A second incident occurred when Pilate appropriated temple funds in order to construct a 35-mile (56.3-kilometer) aqueduct for Jerusalem (<em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Again, there was a major protest. Pilate ordered his soldiers to dress in tunics and infiltrate the crowds in disguise. At his command, the troops used clubs to beat the offenders. Many Jews were killed. Josephus records the horror with which Jerusalem perceived the affair.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, Josephus records the story of Pilate’s dismissal (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.4.1-2). In <span>AD<\/span> 36 a Samaritan false prophet (pretending to be the <em>Taheb,<\/em> or Samaritan messiah) promised to show his followers sacred vessels hidden by Moses on Mt Gerizim. Pilate sent a heavily armed contingent of footmen and cavalry who intercepted the pilgrims and slaughtered most of them. The Samaritans complained to Vitellius, the prefect of Syria, whereupon Pilate was ordered to report to the emperor Tiberius. Another prefect, Marcellus, was then sent by Rome as Pilate’s replacement.<\/p>\n<p>Philo records yet another event (<em>Leg. to Caius<\/em> 299-305). While extolling the liberal policies of Tiberius toward Judaism, he cites a negative example in Pontius Pilate. The prefect had erected gilded shields in Herod’s former palace in Jerusalem that bore the name of the emperor. Refusing to hear Jewish complaints, the sons of Herod appealed to Tiberius, who ordered Pilate to transfer the shields to the temple of Augustus in Caesarea. The similarities with the parallel story in Josephus have led many scholars to believe that Philo is merely recounting another version of the same event.<\/p>\n<p>Luke mentions a minor incident that contributes to this same portrait. In Luke 13:1 some Jews tell Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. While this story is not corroborated by any other witness, it conforms to the impressions of Pilate’s character given by Philo and Josephus. In fact, Luke adds another detail of interest in his trial narrative. In Luke 23:12 he says that prior to the crucifixion of Jesus, Herod Antipas (in Galilee) and Pilate had been at enmity with each other. This may have stemmed not simply from Pilate’s usual antagonism but particularly from the Galilean incident.<\/p>\n<p>Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus is recorded in each Gospel (Mt 27:2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:29) and was remembered as a historical datum in the preaching of the apostles (Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tm 6:13). In order to secure the conviction and death of Jesus, Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin brought their charges to Pilate. While the accusations took on a political flavor to evoke the governor’s interest, he still could find no grounds for condemnation. In the end, Pilate unexpectedly accommodates the Jewish leaders and has Jesus crucified.<\/p>\n<p>All of the Gospels and particularly John show Pilate’s repeated verdict of Jesus’ innocence. According to Matthew 27:19, Pilate’s wife had an ominous dream about Jesus’ conviction, and she warned her husband. Pilate tried to have Jesus released, but the crowd cried for Barabbas. Matthew even records that Pilate washed his hands (27:24-25), declaring his own innocence in this. And finally, John says that Pilate refused to alter the title over the cross (Jn 19:19-22). These accounts, therefore, take the full blame for Jesus’ death from Pilate and place it on the Jewish leaders of the Sanhedrin. They are ultimately responsible.<\/p>\n<p>But why would Pilate act in behalf of the Sanhedrin? Two answers are possible. First, there may have been collusion between Caiaphas and Pilate that stemmed from a long-standing relationship and coterminous reign. Ten of Caiaphas’s eighteen years in power were under Pilate, and when the prefect was dismissed in <span>AD<\/span> 36, Caiaphas was simultaneously removed. Second, if Jesus’ trial occurred in <span>AD<\/span> 33, Pilate may have been concerned about his impeachment. He had originally been appointed by Sejanus (prefect of the praetorians in Rome who had appointed men to colonial office under Tiberius), but in the autumn of <span>AD<\/span> 31 Sejanus died. This explains why a Jewish delegation could report directly to Tiberius during the votive shield incident. Hence, the charge recorded in John 19:12 (“If you release this man, you are not Caesar’s friend”) would have had genuine power over Pilate. Pilate perceived his jeopardy and was anxious to pacify the Jews and please the emperor.<\/p>\n<p>The history of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36 is unknown. Eusebius reports that Pilate ultimately committed suicide during the reign of the emperor Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (<em>History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"PILATE, Pontius Appointed by Tiberius as the fifth prefect of Judea, Pilate served in that capacity from AD 26–36. He appears prominently in the trial narratives of the Gospels as the Roman governor who authorized Jesus’ crucifixion. In addition, he appears in a variety of extrabiblical sources as a dispassionate administrator who relentlessly pursued Roman authority in Judea. Tacitus (Annals 15.44) mentions Pilate in connection with the crucifixion of Jesus but adds little to the Gospel acco...","summary_en":"PILATE, Pontius Appointed by Tiberius as the fifth prefect of Judea, Pilate served in that capacity from AD 26–36. He appears prominently in the trial narratives of the Gospels as the Roman governor who authorized Jesus’ crucifixion. In addition, he appears in a variety of extrabiblical sources as a dispassionate administrator who relentlessly pursued Roman authority in Judea. Tacitus (Annals 15.44) mentions Pilate in connection with the crucifixion of Jesus but adds little to the Gospel acco...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56722,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:29","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:29<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em><em>,<\/em> the fifth Roman <em>governor<\/em> of Judea, ruled the country from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.2-4).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:29<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em><em>,<\/em> the fifth Roman <em>governor<\/em> of Judea, ruled the country from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.2-4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:29 Pilate, the fifth Roman governor of Judea, ruled the country from AD 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, War 2.9.2-4).","summary_en":"18:29 Pilate, the fifth Roman governor of Judea, ruled the country from AD 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, War 2.9.2-4).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84348,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:29","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:29<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em><em>,<\/em> the fifth Roman <em>governor<\/em> of Judea, ruled the country from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.2-4).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:29<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em><em>,<\/em> the fifth Roman <em>governor<\/em> of Judea, ruled the country from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.2-4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:29 Pilate, the fifth Roman governor of Judea, ruled the country from AD 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, War 2.9.2-4).","summary_en":"18:29 Pilate, the fifth Roman governor of Judea, ruled the country from AD 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, War 2.9.2-4).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111974,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:29","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:29<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em><em>,<\/em> the fifth Roman <em>governor<\/em> of Judea, ruled the country from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.2-4).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:29<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em><em>,<\/em> the fifth Roman <em>governor<\/em> of Judea, ruled the country from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.2-4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:29 Pilate, the fifth Roman governor of Judea, ruled the country from AD 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, War 2.9.2-4).","summary_en":"18:29 Pilate, the fifth Roman governor of Judea, ruled the country from AD 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, War 2.9.2-4).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139600,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:29","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:29","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:29<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em><em>,<\/em> the fifth Roman <em>governor<\/em> of Judea, ruled the country from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.2-4).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:29<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em><em>,<\/em> the fifth Roman <em>governor<\/em> of Judea, ruled the country from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.2-4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:29 Pilate, the fifth Roman governor of Judea, ruled the country from AD 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, War 2.9.2-4).","summary_en":"18:29 Pilate, the fifth Roman governor of Judea, ruled the country from AD 26 to 36. He usually lived on the coast in Caesarea, but kept troops stationed in a fortress in Jerusalem where he appeared personally for major festivals. He was a brutal ruler whose atrocities against the Jews were legendary (e.g., Luke 13:1; Josephus, War 2.9.2-4).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"31":[{"id":42208,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Jewish High Council","title_en":"The Jewish High Council","content_ro":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","summary_en":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42291,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Pontius Pilate","title_en":"Pontius Pilate","content_ro":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","summary_en":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69834,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Jewish High Council","title_en":"The Jewish High Council","content_ro":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","summary_en":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69917,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Pontius Pilate","title_en":"Pontius Pilate","content_ro":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","summary_en":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97460,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Jewish High Council","title_en":"The Jewish High Council","content_ro":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","summary_en":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97543,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Pontius Pilate","title_en":"Pontius Pilate","content_ro":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","summary_en":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125086,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Jewish High Council","title_en":"The Jewish High Council","content_ro":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Jewish High Council<\/h3>\n<p>The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span> (“council”).<\/p>\n<p>According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 <span>BC<\/span>). The Sanhedrin probably emerged from a self-governing body of leaders under the Persians (see Ezra 5:5-10; Neh 2:16). The high council was controlled by the priestly class under the leadership of the high priest, though these priests were influenced to various degrees by Roman rulers and the Pharisees. Herod the Great exercised a particularly heavy hand over the affairs of the Sanhedrin.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin managed the internal legal and religious affairs of Judaism, including judicial decisions not resolved in lesser courts (called “local sanhedrins”), criminal justice and arrests (see Acts 9:1-2), and official (though unenforceable) decisions regarding Jewish matters. Though the Sanhedrin could not of its own accord put tried criminals to death (John 18:31), apparently it could do so with the support of Roman officials.<\/p>\n<p>The destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 eliminated the high council as the ruling body of Judaism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; 15:1, 43; Luke 22:66-71; 23:50-54; John 11:47-53; Acts 5:21-41; 6:11–8:1; 22:30–23:10; 23:26-30<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","summary_en":"The Jewish High Council The high council of Jewish aristocrats in Jerusalem was endowed with considerable power in governing the Jewish people. It is traditionally called the Sanhedrin, a transliteration of the Greek word sunedrion (“council”). According to Jewish tradition, the Sanhedrin dates from Moses’ choice of seventy elders (Num 11:16), but the earliest datable reference is found in Josephus (Antiquities 12.3.3) from the time of Antiochus the Great (223–187 BC). The Sanhedrin probably ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125169,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Pontius Pilate","title_en":"Pontius Pilate","content_ro":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","summary_en":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4780,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","title_en":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":7832,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Courts and Trials","title_en":"Courts and Trials","content_ro":"<h3>COURTS AND TRIALS<\/h3>\n<p>Legal disputes were as much a part of life in Bible times as they are today. The ways that courts operated and trials were conducted, however, were quite different. Unless those customs are understood, modern readers of the Bible, thinking of contemporary legal procedures, may misunderstand the judicial accounts contained in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLegalProcedures\">Old Testament Legal Procedures<\/p>\n<h5>Exodus to Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy contain most of the law in the OT, plus much other information about courts and legal procedures. Those books reveal how trials were conducted before Israel had kings. Certain changes in the legal system occurring after the establishment of the monarchy (c. 1000 <span>BC<\/span>) are described in other OT books.<\/p>\n<p>The OT depicts God as supreme lawgiver and judge, with Moses and later the kings as God’s deputies. But Moses did not create the law or decide the most difficult cases, which were referred directly to God for the decision (see Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36; 27:1-11). When disputes arose between Israel’s leaders, God intervened, judging the guilty party directly (Nm 16–17). Thus law is seen in the OT as a divine revelation, not a human creation, as it was regarded in ancient Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Usually it was not necessary to seek God’s direct guidance; precedent was sufficient. Elders were appointed in Israel to serve as judges of all but the most serious cases, relieving Moses of the burden of judging all the people himself (Ex 18:13-27). Deuteronomy 16:18 specifies that “judges” be appointed in every town; in other passages those responsible for punishing criminals are called “the elders” (Dt 19:12). The local judges were obviously nonprofessionals selected from the most respected members of each tribe or village. Difficult cases were referred to a central court of justice to be decided by the priests and, in the period of the judges, by the civil and military leader (17:8-12). Deborah and Samuel were both examples of such “judges of Israel.” Samuel even conducted a circuit court in a number of different centers (Jgs 4:4-5; 1 Sm 7:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>In Israel, as in other ancient societies, private prosecution was the norm. An individual with a grievance had to bring the case before the court. Only in situations of idolatry or other serious religious crimes were public prosecutions instituted (Dt 13; 17:2-7). Even in murder cases prosecution was left in the hands of the victim’s relatives. One relative, called the “avenger of blood,” had to pursue the alleged murderer to the nearest city of refuge, where a trial was held (Nm 35:10-34; Dt 19:1-13).<\/p>\n<p>Trials were held in a public place, such as the open space near a city gate (Dt 21:19). During the trial, the judges were seated, but the parties to the dispute and the witnesses stood. At least two witnesses were required to convict (19:15). They had to be eyewitnesses who had caught the accused red-handed. Where such clear-cut evidence was lacking (for example in disputes over ownership), the litigants could take an oath to demonstrate their honesty (Ex 22:8-13). If a husband suspected his wife of infidelity but had no proof, he could require her to undergo an ordeal of drinking “bitter water” to demonstrate her innocence (Nm 5:6-31).<\/p>\n<p>When all the evidence had been presented, the judges gave their verdict. Those who had brought the accusation had the duty of enforcing the court’s sentence. Thus, a witness of idolatry had to throw the first stone at the guilty person’s execution (Dt 17:7). Certain administrative officials may have had the job of writing down the court’s decision and seeing that it was enforced (16:18). At times it may have been difficult for people to uphold their legal rights if their opponent came from a strong and wealthy family.<\/p>\n<h5>Other Old Testament Books<\/h5>\n<p>When Israel became a kingdom, certain changes were made in its judicial system. Most obviously, the king became the supreme judge who dealt with the most difficult cases. Solomon demonstrated his great wisdom in adjudicating between two women who both claimed to be the mother of a particular baby (1 Kgs 3:16-28). Kings, who had all the power necessary to enforce their decisions, were expected to use it to help the weak members of society, such as orphans and widows (Ps 72:12).<\/p>\n<p>In practice, however, Israel’s kings did not always live up to that ideal. Absalom sowed the seeds of a revolution by telling those who came to the royal court that his father, King David, did not administer justice well (2 Sm 15:1-6). One notable trial in the OT illustrates how royal judicial powers could be completely misused by unscrupulous rulers. Naboth was put to death on a trumped-up charge of blasphemy so that King Ahab could extend his palace grounds by taking over Naboth’s vineyard. Though the charge was false, the trial followed correct legal procedures. Two scoundrels were found to give evidence that they had heard Naboth curse God and the king (1 Kgs 21:10); one witness would have been insufficient to secure conviction. Naboth was tried by the elders of the city in a public place. After being convicted he was taken outside the city and executed (vv 11-13). In other trials the prophet Jeremiah was charged with subversive activities more than once (Jer 26; 37:11–38:28).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets sometimes pictured God as taking Israel to court to answer for the nation’s misdeeds. God would list Israel’s sins and invite the people to explain their behavior. Sometimes heaven and earth, or the mountains, were called to be witnesses confirming the truth of God’s accusations. Finally judgment was pronounced (e.g., Is 1:2-26; 43; Jer 2:4-37; Mi 6).<\/p>\n<p>A theme running through the book of Job is Job’s request for a trial. Job thought that if he were given a fair hearing, his innocence would be demonstrated and God would stop causing him so much suffering (cf. Jb 13:23). Eventually God heeded Job’s request and a long cross-examination began, finally reducing Job to silence (42:1-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentLegalProcedures\">New Testament Legal Procedures<\/p>\n<p>Numerous trials occur in the NT. Jesus was tried by the Sanhedrin (the supreme Jewish religious court) and also by the Roman governor. The book of Acts mentions various court actions designed to stop the spread of Christianity. Luke, the author of Acts, presents a vivid and accurate description of how courts operated in provinces of the Roman Empire. Acts reaches a climax with Paul traveling to Rome to have his case heard by the Roman emperor Nero. Legal procedures in Roman courts were governed by complicated rules broadly resembling modern judicial technicalities. Serious crime was handled by public prosecutors, and trials were usually conducted by one judge. There were lawyers for the prosecution and lawyers for the defense.<\/p>\n<p>In Judea and other provinces of the empire, the local legal system was not suppressed. Traditional Jewish courts were allowed to try minor and religious offenses (Acts 4; 6:12–7:60) but were not permitted to handle serious cases where the death penalty might be involved. For that reason, when the Sanhedrin found Jesus guilty of blasphemy for claiming to be the Son of God and the Messiah, they had to transfer the case to Pontius Pilate, the Roman procurator (governor) of Judea. The Jews considered blasphemy worthy of death, but as they admitted to Pilate, “It is not lawful for us to put any man to death” (Jn 18:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The rule throughout the Roman Empire was that only governors could pronounce the death sentence. Execution of the apostle James by Jewish authorities, mentioned by the Jewish historian Josephus, took place during an interregnum between two governors. The stoning of Stephen was done in haste, without the consent of Pilate (Acts 7).<\/p>\n<h5>The Trials of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was first tried by the Sanhedrin, presided over by the high priest. By later standards of Jewish legal practice, that trial was somewhat irregular. For example, it seems to have been held both at night and on the eve of a festival. Criminal trials were not supposed to take place at such times. It is uncertain that those rules existed in Jesus’ day, but even if they did, little can be made of that technicality since the Jewish court had no power to carry out its sentence.<\/p>\n<p>After conviction by the Sanhedrin, Jesus was taken to Pilate, whose Jerusalem residence, the old royal palace called the Praetorium, was on the western side of the city near the modern Jaffa Gate. The Romans were unlikely to sentence anyone to death in a religious matter, so the Jewish authorities presented their charges against Jesus in political language: he violated the law by “forbidding us to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ a king” (Lk 23:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). Perhaps sensing something false about those charges (they were actually religious rather than political), Pilate sent Jesus to Herod, the ruler of Galilee, who was in Jerusalem at the time. Pilate, who did not have to send Galileans to Herod for trial, probably saw this as a means of avoiding an uncomfortable decision. Herod, however, pronounced Jesus innocent and returned him to Pilate.<\/p>\n<p>Pilate offered to give Jesus a disciplinary beating traditionally given to troublemakers as a warning to behave themselves in the future (Lk 23:16). But that did not satisfy Jesus’ accusers, who pressed the charge of insurrection, threatening to report Pilate to the emperor if he did not convict Jesus. Pilate, who had not been a very successful governor, feared official complaints about his administration, so the threat worked. He sentenced Jesus to be crucified on the charge of being king of the Jews. The heavy scourging that preceded the Crucifixion was never a punishment by itself but was a frequent accompaniment to other punishments. Another feature of Roman legal practice illustrated in the Gospels was the division of Jesus’ clothes among the soldiers; executioners were allowed to keep such personal effects as a fringe benefit.<\/p>\n<h5>The Trials of the Apostle Paul<\/h5>\n<p>Paul’s trials recorded in the book of Acts also reflect the division between Jewish and Roman authority in legal matters. When arrested, Paul had a preliminary hearing before the Sanhedrin (Acts 23). He was then transferred to the governor for a formal trial in Caesarea, the governor’s usual headquarters. There he was tried before Felix, who adjourned the case for two years until a new governor could be appointed. Luke reported that Felix (another unpopular governor) did that to please the Jews, but it was quite common for governors to leave cases to be dealt with by their successors.<\/p>\n<p>When Festus, the new governor, arrived, he suggested that Paul be tried in Jerusalem. Paul, disliking the prospect of being tried there, exercised his right as a Roman citizen to be tried in Rome before the emperor (Acts 25:1-20). The rest of the book of Acts tells how Paul eventually reached Rome and had to wait another two years before his case was heard. No details of Paul’s trial in Rome are known, but Nero, who was emperor when Paul arrived, tried very few cases himself. He appointed judges to handle appeals cases such as Paul’s, so it is unlikely that Paul was actually tried by Nero.<\/p>\n<p>The right of appeal to the emperor was not the only legal right possessed by Roman citizens. They were also protected from being beaten without a trial, a right asserted by Paul in Philippi and Jerusalem (Acts 16:37; 22:24-29).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Avenger of Blood; Cities of Refuge; Civil Law and Justice; Criminal Law and Punishment; Sanhedrin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COURTS AND TRIALS<\/h3>\n<p>Legal disputes were as much a part of life in Bible times as they are today. The ways that courts operated and trials were conducted, however, were quite different. Unless those customs are understood, modern readers of the Bible, thinking of contemporary legal procedures, may misunderstand the judicial accounts contained in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentLegalProcedures\">Old Testament Legal Procedures<\/p>\n<h5>Exodus to Deuteronomy<\/h5>\n<p>The books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy contain most of the law in the OT, plus much other information about courts and legal procedures. Those books reveal how trials were conducted before Israel had kings. Certain changes in the legal system occurring after the establishment of the monarchy (c. 1000 <span>BC<\/span>) are described in other OT books.<\/p>\n<p>The OT depicts God as supreme lawgiver and judge, with Moses and later the kings as God’s deputies. But Moses did not create the law or decide the most difficult cases, which were referred directly to God for the decision (see Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36; 27:1-11). When disputes arose between Israel’s leaders, God intervened, judging the guilty party directly (Nm 16–17). Thus law is seen in the OT as a divine revelation, not a human creation, as it was regarded in ancient Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Usually it was not necessary to seek God’s direct guidance; precedent was sufficient. Elders were appointed in Israel to serve as judges of all but the most serious cases, relieving Moses of the burden of judging all the people himself (Ex 18:13-27). Deuteronomy 16:18 specifies that “judges” be appointed in every town; in other passages those responsible for punishing criminals are called “the elders” (Dt 19:12). The local judges were obviously nonprofessionals selected from the most respected members of each tribe or village. Difficult cases were referred to a central court of justice to be decided by the priests and, in the period of the judges, by the civil and military leader (17:8-12). Deborah and Samuel were both examples of such “judges of Israel.” Samuel even conducted a circuit court in a number of different centers (Jgs 4:4-5; 1 Sm 7:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>In Israel, as in other ancient societies, private prosecution was the norm. An individual with a grievance had to bring the case before the court. Only in situations of idolatry or other serious religious crimes were public prosecutions instituted (Dt 13; 17:2-7). Even in murder cases prosecution was left in the hands of the victim’s relatives. One relative, called the “avenger of blood,” had to pursue the alleged murderer to the nearest city of refuge, where a trial was held (Nm 35:10-34; Dt 19:1-13).<\/p>\n<p>Trials were held in a public place, such as the open space near a city gate (Dt 21:19). During the trial, the judges were seated, but the parties to the dispute and the witnesses stood. At least two witnesses were required to convict (19:15). They had to be eyewitnesses who had caught the accused red-handed. Where such clear-cut evidence was lacking (for example in disputes over ownership), the litigants could take an oath to demonstrate their honesty (Ex 22:8-13). If a husband suspected his wife of infidelity but had no proof, he could require her to undergo an ordeal of drinking “bitter water” to demonstrate her innocence (Nm 5:6-31).<\/p>\n<p>When all the evidence had been presented, the judges gave their verdict. Those who had brought the accusation had the duty of enforcing the court’s sentence. Thus, a witness of idolatry had to throw the first stone at the guilty person’s execution (Dt 17:7). Certain administrative officials may have had the job of writing down the court’s decision and seeing that it was enforced (16:18). At times it may have been difficult for people to uphold their legal rights if their opponent came from a strong and wealthy family.<\/p>\n<h5>Other Old Testament Books<\/h5>\n<p>When Israel became a kingdom, certain changes were made in its judicial system. Most obviously, the king became the supreme judge who dealt with the most difficult cases. Solomon demonstrated his great wisdom in adjudicating between two women who both claimed to be the mother of a particular baby (1 Kgs 3:16-28). Kings, who had all the power necessary to enforce their decisions, were expected to use it to help the weak members of society, such as orphans and widows (Ps 72:12).<\/p>\n<p>In practice, however, Israel’s kings did not always live up to that ideal. Absalom sowed the seeds of a revolution by telling those who came to the royal court that his father, King David, did not administer justice well (2 Sm 15:1-6). One notable trial in the OT illustrates how royal judicial powers could be completely misused by unscrupulous rulers. Naboth was put to death on a trumped-up charge of blasphemy so that King Ahab could extend his palace grounds by taking over Naboth’s vineyard. Though the charge was false, the trial followed correct legal procedures. Two scoundrels were found to give evidence that they had heard Naboth curse God and the king (1 Kgs 21:10); one witness would have been insufficient to secure conviction. Naboth was tried by the elders of the city in a public place. After being convicted he was taken outside the city and executed (vv 11-13). In other trials the prophet Jeremiah was charged with subversive activities more than once (Jer 26; 37:11–38:28).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets sometimes pictured God as taking Israel to court to answer for the nation’s misdeeds. God would list Israel’s sins and invite the people to explain their behavior. Sometimes heaven and earth, or the mountains, were called to be witnesses confirming the truth of God’s accusations. Finally judgment was pronounced (e.g., Is 1:2-26; 43; Jer 2:4-37; Mi 6).<\/p>\n<p>A theme running through the book of Job is Job’s request for a trial. Job thought that if he were given a fair hearing, his innocence would be demonstrated and God would stop causing him so much suffering (cf. Jb 13:23). Eventually God heeded Job’s request and a long cross-examination began, finally reducing Job to silence (42:1-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentLegalProcedures\">New Testament Legal Procedures<\/p>\n<p>Numerous trials occur in the NT. Jesus was tried by the Sanhedrin (the supreme Jewish religious court) and also by the Roman governor. The book of Acts mentions various court actions designed to stop the spread of Christianity. Luke, the author of Acts, presents a vivid and accurate description of how courts operated in provinces of the Roman Empire. Acts reaches a climax with Paul traveling to Rome to have his case heard by the Roman emperor Nero. Legal procedures in Roman courts were governed by complicated rules broadly resembling modern judicial technicalities. Serious crime was handled by public prosecutors, and trials were usually conducted by one judge. There were lawyers for the prosecution and lawyers for the defense.<\/p>\n<p>In Judea and other provinces of the empire, the local legal system was not suppressed. Traditional Jewish courts were allowed to try minor and religious offenses (Acts 4; 6:12–7:60) but were not permitted to handle serious cases where the death penalty might be involved. For that reason, when the Sanhedrin found Jesus guilty of blasphemy for claiming to be the Son of God and the Messiah, they had to transfer the case to Pontius Pilate, the Roman procurator (governor) of Judea. The Jews considered blasphemy worthy of death, but as they admitted to Pilate, “It is not lawful for us to put any man to death” (Jn 18:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The rule throughout the Roman Empire was that only governors could pronounce the death sentence. Execution of the apostle James by Jewish authorities, mentioned by the Jewish historian Josephus, took place during an interregnum between two governors. The stoning of Stephen was done in haste, without the consent of Pilate (Acts 7).<\/p>\n<h5>The Trials of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was first tried by the Sanhedrin, presided over by the high priest. By later standards of Jewish legal practice, that trial was somewhat irregular. For example, it seems to have been held both at night and on the eve of a festival. Criminal trials were not supposed to take place at such times. It is uncertain that those rules existed in Jesus’ day, but even if they did, little can be made of that technicality since the Jewish court had no power to carry out its sentence.<\/p>\n<p>After conviction by the Sanhedrin, Jesus was taken to Pilate, whose Jerusalem residence, the old royal palace called the Praetorium, was on the western side of the city near the modern Jaffa Gate. The Romans were unlikely to sentence anyone to death in a religious matter, so the Jewish authorities presented their charges against Jesus in political language: he violated the law by “forbidding us to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ a king” (Lk 23:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). Perhaps sensing something false about those charges (they were actually religious rather than political), Pilate sent Jesus to Herod, the ruler of Galilee, who was in Jerusalem at the time. Pilate, who did not have to send Galileans to Herod for trial, probably saw this as a means of avoiding an uncomfortable decision. Herod, however, pronounced Jesus innocent and returned him to Pilate.<\/p>\n<p>Pilate offered to give Jesus a disciplinary beating traditionally given to troublemakers as a warning to behave themselves in the future (Lk 23:16). But that did not satisfy Jesus’ accusers, who pressed the charge of insurrection, threatening to report Pilate to the emperor if he did not convict Jesus. Pilate, who had not been a very successful governor, feared official complaints about his administration, so the threat worked. He sentenced Jesus to be crucified on the charge of being king of the Jews. The heavy scourging that preceded the Crucifixion was never a punishment by itself but was a frequent accompaniment to other punishments. Another feature of Roman legal practice illustrated in the Gospels was the division of Jesus’ clothes among the soldiers; executioners were allowed to keep such personal effects as a fringe benefit.<\/p>\n<h5>The Trials of the Apostle Paul<\/h5>\n<p>Paul’s trials recorded in the book of Acts also reflect the division between Jewish and Roman authority in legal matters. When arrested, Paul had a preliminary hearing before the Sanhedrin (Acts 23). He was then transferred to the governor for a formal trial in Caesarea, the governor’s usual headquarters. There he was tried before Felix, who adjourned the case for two years until a new governor could be appointed. Luke reported that Felix (another unpopular governor) did that to please the Jews, but it was quite common for governors to leave cases to be dealt with by their successors.<\/p>\n<p>When Festus, the new governor, arrived, he suggested that Paul be tried in Jerusalem. Paul, disliking the prospect of being tried there, exercised his right as a Roman citizen to be tried in Rome before the emperor (Acts 25:1-20). The rest of the book of Acts tells how Paul eventually reached Rome and had to wait another two years before his case was heard. No details of Paul’s trial in Rome are known, but Nero, who was emperor when Paul arrived, tried very few cases himself. He appointed judges to handle appeals cases such as Paul’s, so it is unlikely that Paul was actually tried by Nero.<\/p>\n<p>The right of appeal to the emperor was not the only legal right possessed by Roman citizens. They were also protected from being beaten without a trial, a right asserted by Paul in Philippi and Jerusalem (Acts 16:37; 22:24-29).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Avenger of Blood; Cities of Refuge; Civil Law and Justice; Criminal Law and Punishment; Sanhedrin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COURTS AND TRIALS Legal disputes were as much a part of life in Bible times as they are today. The ways that courts operated and trials were conducted, however, were quite different. Unless those customs are understood, modern readers of the Bible, thinking of contemporary legal procedures, may misunderstand the judicial accounts contained in the Bible. Old Testament Legal Procedures Exodus to Deuteronomy The books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy contain most of the law in the ...","summary_en":"COURTS AND TRIALS Legal disputes were as much a part of life in Bible times as they are today. The ways that courts operated and trials were conducted, however, were quite different. Unless those customs are understood, modern readers of the Bible, thinking of contemporary legal procedures, may misunderstand the judicial accounts contained in the Bible. Old Testament Legal Procedures Exodus to Deuteronomy The books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy contain most of the law in the ...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33907,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sanhedrin*","title_en":"Sanhedrin*","content_ro":"<h3>SANHEDRIN*<\/h3>\n<p>Supreme judicial council (<span>nlt<\/span> “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubtful (Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6; cf. Nm 11:16). These were probably informal gatherings of tribal elders (1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 23:1). The likely origin of the Sanhedrin is to be found in the postexilic period, when those who reorganized Israel without a king made the ancient ruling families the basis of authority. The legislative assembly that emerged was a union of the nobility of the land and the priestly aristocracy (see Ezr 5:5; Neh 2:16). The influence of this council increased due to the relative freedom enjoyed under the Persians.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Hellenism in Israel in the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> affirmed this government. Hellenistic cities commonly possessed democratic assemblies and a council. Jerusalem hosted an aristocratic council that was given its appropriate Greek title, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Gerousia<\/span><em>.<\/em> This council is first noted by Josephus, who records the decree of Antiochus III after his seizure of Jerusalem (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3). Yet even though the political climate shifted drastically, the council still remained in force. Judas Maccabeus expelled the old line of elders and installed another hereditary rulership stemming from the Hasmonean families. Thus the Gerousia continued as a council of the nobility. But in the first century <span>BC<\/span>, as the tensions between Sadducees and Pharisees were pulling apart the fabric of Judaism, the council underwent a transformation. From the time of Alexandra (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>), scribes of Pharisee persuasion entered the council. Thereafter, the Gerousia was a mixture: aristocratic nobility on the one hand (both lay and priestly) and the popular Pharisees on the other.<\/p>\n<p>The Romans left the council intact but more carefully defined the limits of its jurisdiction. As Judaism lost its self-government, the council lost much legislative and political power. Rome appointed the true powers of the land. For instance, Herod the Great began his rule in severe conflict with the old aristocracy, and in the end executed most of the Sanhedrin members (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). The prefects appointed the high priests and, as a symbol of control, from <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 36 they kept the priests’ vestments in the Antonia fortress.<\/p>\n<p>The name Sanhedrin (Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span><em>,<\/em> from <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sun<\/span><em>,<\/em> “together,” and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hedra<\/span><em>,<\/em> “seat”) occurs for the first time in the reign of Herod the Great (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.3-5). This is the term used throughout the NT (22 times), along with “the elders” (Lk 22:66; Acts 22:5) and “gerousia” (Acts 5:21). The Mishnah provides still more titles: The Great Tribunal (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2), the Great Sanhedrin (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6), and the Sanhedrin of the 71 (<em>Shebuoth<\/em> 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>After the great war of <span>AD<\/span> 70, when the final vestiges of Jewish autonomy were destroyed by Rome, the Sanhedrin reconvened in Jamnia. Its power, however, was only theoretical (addressing religious issues primarily), and the Romans gave it little consideration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Character\">Character<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about the procedure for admission into the Sanhedrin, but because the council had aristocratic roots (and was not truly democratic), appointments were probably made from among the priests, leading scribes, and lay nobility. The Mishnah stipulates that the sole test of membership was rabbinic learning along with true Israelite descent (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:4). The council had 71 members (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6) divided into the following three categories: the high priests, the elders, and the scribes.<\/p>\n<h5>The High Priests<\/h5>\n<p>Usually from Sadducean backgrounds, these were the most powerful men of the Sanhedrin. Some scholars believe that they comprised an executive council of ten wealthy and distinguished citizens, on the pattern of several Greek and Roman cities. Tiberias in Galilee, for instance, was ruled by such a board, and Josephus refers to them as a body of “the ten foremost men” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.8.11; cf. Acts 4:6). One was the captain of the temple, who supervised temple proceedings and was commander of the temple guard (Acts 5:24-26). Others served as treasurers who controlled the wages of priests and workers and monitored the vast amount of money coming through the temple. Income came from sacrifices and market taxes; the payroll included as many as 18,000 men during Herod’s reconstruction of the temple. There was a president of the Sanhedrin who also headed this council and was called “the high priest” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.10.5). In the NT he is a leading figure: Caiaphas ruled in Jesus’ day (Mt 26:3), and Ananias in Paul’s day (Acts 23:2). In Luke 3:2 and Acts 4:6, Annas is termed a high priest, but his title is emeritus, since his reign ended in <span>AD<\/span> 15.<\/p>\n<h5>The Elders<\/h5>\n<p>This was a major category and represented the priestly and financial aristocracy in Judea. Distinguished laymen, such as Joseph of Arimathea (Mk 15:43), shared the conservative views of the Sadducees and gave the assembly the diversity of a modern parliament.<\/p>\n<h5>The Scribes<\/h5>\n<p>These were the most recent members of the Sanhedrin. Mostly Pharisees, they were professional lawyers trained in theology, jurisprudence, and philosophy. They were organized in guilds and often followed celebrated teachers. One famous Sanhedrin scribe, Gamaliel, appears in the NT (Acts 5:34) and was the rabbinic scholar who instructed Paul (22:3).<\/p>\n<h5>In Jesus’ Day<\/h5>\n<p>The domain of the Sanhedrin was formally restricted to Judea, but there was a de facto influence that affected Galilee and even Damascus (cf. Acts 9:2; 22:5). The council was chiefly concerned to arbitrate matters of Jewish law when disagreements arose (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2). In all cases, its decision was final. It prosecuted charges of blasphemy, as in the cases of Jesus (Mt 26:65) and Stephen (Acts 6:12-14), and participated in criminal justice as well.<\/p>\n<p>It is still not known if the Sanhedrin had the power of capital punishment. Philo seems to indicate that violations to the temple could be prosecuted in the Roman period (<em>Legatio to Gaius,<\/em> 39). This may explain the deaths of Stephen (Acts 7:58-60) and James (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.9.1). At any rate, Gentiles caught trespassing in the temple precincts were warned about an automatic death penalty. But the NT and the Talmud disagree with this. In the trial of Jesus, the authorities are compelled to involve Pilate who alone can put Jesus to death (Jn 18:31). According to the Talmud, the Sanhedrin lost this privilege “forty years before the destruction of the temple” (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> I 18a, 34; VII 24b).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JudicialProcedure\">Judicial Procedure<\/p>\n<p>Despite the serious irregularities of Jesus’ trial, the formal procedures of Sanhedrin law describe a court that was fair and exceedingly concerned about the miscarriage of justice. Unfortunately, the procedural notes in the Mishnah only address guidelines for lesser courts (Sanhedrins with 23 members), but it can be reasonably conjectured that similar rules applied to the Great Sanhedrin of 71. In sections four and five of the Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin,<\/em> these guidelines are carefully set forth.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin sat in semicircular rows so that members could view one another. Two clerks sat at either end, taking notes and recording votes. Facing the assembly sat three rows of students, who were usually disciples of leading scribes. The accused stood in the middle facing the elders. He was required to show abject humility: he was dressed in a black robe as if in mourning and wore his hair disheveled (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). After questioning, he was dismissed and deliberations were private.<\/p>\n<p>The procedures for capital cases illustrate the concern for fairness. The defense would be heard first and then the accusations. An elder who had spoken for the defense could not then speak against the accused. Students could speak only for but never against the accused (but in noncapital cases they could do either). Members stood to vote, beginning with the youngest. Acquittal required a simple majority, but condemnation demanded a majority of two.<\/p>\n<p>In noncapital cases, the trial was heard during the daytime and the verdict could be given at night. In capital cases, both trial and verdict were during the day and thus open to more public scrutiny. In noncapital cases, any verdict could be reached the same day. In capital cases, the verdict of guilt (which was immediately followed by execution) had to be postponed one day because its consequences were irreversible. Hence, these trials were not to be held on the eve of the Sabbath or a festival day (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:1).<\/p>\n<p>The trial of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels shows many departures from the usual pattern of Sanhedrin justice. It seems clear that a miscarriage of justice was evidenced in Jesus’ arrest, interrogation, and death.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Courts and Trials; Jerusalem Council.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SANHEDRIN*<\/h3>\n<p>Supreme judicial council (<span>nlt<\/span> “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubtful (Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6; cf. Nm 11:16). These were probably informal gatherings of tribal elders (1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Kgs 23:1). The likely origin of the Sanhedrin is to be found in the postexilic period, when those who reorganized Israel without a king made the ancient ruling families the basis of authority. The legislative assembly that emerged was a union of the nobility of the land and the priestly aristocracy (see Ezr 5:5; Neh 2:16). The influence of this council increased due to the relative freedom enjoyed under the Persians.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Hellenism in Israel in the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> affirmed this government. Hellenistic cities commonly possessed democratic assemblies and a council. Jerusalem hosted an aristocratic council that was given its appropriate Greek title, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Gerousia<\/span><em>.<\/em> This council is first noted by Josephus, who records the decree of Antiochus III after his seizure of Jerusalem (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 12.3.3). Yet even though the political climate shifted drastically, the council still remained in force. Judas Maccabeus expelled the old line of elders and installed another hereditary rulership stemming from the Hasmonean families. Thus the Gerousia continued as a council of the nobility. But in the first century <span>BC<\/span>, as the tensions between Sadducees and Pharisees were pulling apart the fabric of Judaism, the council underwent a transformation. From the time of Alexandra (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>), scribes of Pharisee persuasion entered the council. Thereafter, the Gerousia was a mixture: aristocratic nobility on the one hand (both lay and priestly) and the popular Pharisees on the other.<\/p>\n<p>The Romans left the council intact but more carefully defined the limits of its jurisdiction. As Judaism lost its self-government, the council lost much legislative and political power. Rome appointed the true powers of the land. For instance, Herod the Great began his rule in severe conflict with the old aristocracy, and in the end executed most of the Sanhedrin members (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). The prefects appointed the high priests and, as a symbol of control, from <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 36 they kept the priests’ vestments in the Antonia fortress.<\/p>\n<p>The name Sanhedrin (Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sunedrion<\/span><em>,<\/em> from <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sun<\/span><em>,<\/em> “together,” and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hedra<\/span><em>,<\/em> “seat”) occurs for the first time in the reign of Herod the Great (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.3-5). This is the term used throughout the NT (22 times), along with “the elders” (Lk 22:66; Acts 22:5) and “gerousia” (Acts 5:21). The Mishnah provides still more titles: The Great Tribunal (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2), the Great Sanhedrin (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6), and the Sanhedrin of the 71 (<em>Shebuoth<\/em> 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>After the great war of <span>AD<\/span> 70, when the final vestiges of Jewish autonomy were destroyed by Rome, the Sanhedrin reconvened in Jamnia. Its power, however, was only theoretical (addressing religious issues primarily), and the Romans gave it little consideration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Character\">Character<\/p>\n<p>Little is known about the procedure for admission into the Sanhedrin, but because the council had aristocratic roots (and was not truly democratic), appointments were probably made from among the priests, leading scribes, and lay nobility. The Mishnah stipulates that the sole test of membership was rabbinic learning along with true Israelite descent (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:4). The council had 71 members (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 1:6) divided into the following three categories: the high priests, the elders, and the scribes.<\/p>\n<h5>The High Priests<\/h5>\n<p>Usually from Sadducean backgrounds, these were the most powerful men of the Sanhedrin. Some scholars believe that they comprised an executive council of ten wealthy and distinguished citizens, on the pattern of several Greek and Roman cities. Tiberias in Galilee, for instance, was ruled by such a board, and Josephus refers to them as a body of “the ten foremost men” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.8.11; cf. Acts 4:6). One was the captain of the temple, who supervised temple proceedings and was commander of the temple guard (Acts 5:24-26). Others served as treasurers who controlled the wages of priests and workers and monitored the vast amount of money coming through the temple. Income came from sacrifices and market taxes; the payroll included as many as 18,000 men during Herod’s reconstruction of the temple. There was a president of the Sanhedrin who also headed this council and was called “the high priest” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.10.5). In the NT he is a leading figure: Caiaphas ruled in Jesus’ day (Mt 26:3), and Ananias in Paul’s day (Acts 23:2). In Luke 3:2 and Acts 4:6, Annas is termed a high priest, but his title is emeritus, since his reign ended in <span>AD<\/span> 15.<\/p>\n<h5>The Elders<\/h5>\n<p>This was a major category and represented the priestly and financial aristocracy in Judea. Distinguished laymen, such as Joseph of Arimathea (Mk 15:43), shared the conservative views of the Sadducees and gave the assembly the diversity of a modern parliament.<\/p>\n<h5>The Scribes<\/h5>\n<p>These were the most recent members of the Sanhedrin. Mostly Pharisees, they were professional lawyers trained in theology, jurisprudence, and philosophy. They were organized in guilds and often followed celebrated teachers. One famous Sanhedrin scribe, Gamaliel, appears in the NT (Acts 5:34) and was the rabbinic scholar who instructed Paul (22:3).<\/p>\n<h5>In Jesus’ Day<\/h5>\n<p>The domain of the Sanhedrin was formally restricted to Judea, but there was a de facto influence that affected Galilee and even Damascus (cf. Acts 9:2; 22:5). The council was chiefly concerned to arbitrate matters of Jewish law when disagreements arose (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 11:2). In all cases, its decision was final. It prosecuted charges of blasphemy, as in the cases of Jesus (Mt 26:65) and Stephen (Acts 6:12-14), and participated in criminal justice as well.<\/p>\n<p>It is still not known if the Sanhedrin had the power of capital punishment. Philo seems to indicate that violations to the temple could be prosecuted in the Roman period (<em>Legatio to Gaius,<\/em> 39). This may explain the deaths of Stephen (Acts 7:58-60) and James (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.9.1). At any rate, Gentiles caught trespassing in the temple precincts were warned about an automatic death penalty. But the NT and the Talmud disagree with this. In the trial of Jesus, the authorities are compelled to involve Pilate who alone can put Jesus to death (Jn 18:31). According to the Talmud, the Sanhedrin lost this privilege “forty years before the destruction of the temple” (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> I 18a, 34; VII 24b).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JudicialProcedure\">Judicial Procedure<\/p>\n<p>Despite the serious irregularities of Jesus’ trial, the formal procedures of Sanhedrin law describe a court that was fair and exceedingly concerned about the miscarriage of justice. Unfortunately, the procedural notes in the Mishnah only address guidelines for lesser courts (Sanhedrins with 23 members), but it can be reasonably conjectured that similar rules applied to the Great Sanhedrin of 71. In sections four and five of the Mishnah tractate <em>Sanhedrin,<\/em> these guidelines are carefully set forth.<\/p>\n<p>The Sanhedrin sat in semicircular rows so that members could view one another. Two clerks sat at either end, taking notes and recording votes. Facing the assembly sat three rows of students, who were usually disciples of leading scribes. The accused stood in the middle facing the elders. He was required to show abject humility: he was dressed in a black robe as if in mourning and wore his hair disheveled (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 14.9.4). After questioning, he was dismissed and deliberations were private.<\/p>\n<p>The procedures for capital cases illustrate the concern for fairness. The defense would be heard first and then the accusations. An elder who had spoken for the defense could not then speak against the accused. Students could speak only for but never against the accused (but in noncapital cases they could do either). Members stood to vote, beginning with the youngest. Acquittal required a simple majority, but condemnation demanded a majority of two.<\/p>\n<p>In noncapital cases, the trial was heard during the daytime and the verdict could be given at night. In capital cases, both trial and verdict were during the day and thus open to more public scrutiny. In noncapital cases, any verdict could be reached the same day. In capital cases, the verdict of guilt (which was immediately followed by execution) had to be postponed one day because its consequences were irreversible. Hence, these trials were not to be held on the eve of the Sabbath or a festival day (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 4:1).<\/p>\n<p>The trial of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels shows many departures from the usual pattern of Sanhedrin justice. It seems clear that a miscarriage of justice was evidenced in Jesus’ arrest, interrogation, and death.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Courts and Trials; Jerusalem Council.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SANHEDRIN* Supreme judicial council (nlt “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church. History The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubt...","summary_en":"SANHEDRIN* Supreme judicial council (nlt “high council”) of Judaism with 71 members, located in Jerusalem. It figures prominently in the Passion narratives of the Gospels as the body that tried Jesus, and it appears again in Acts as the judicial court that investigated and persecuted the growing Christian church. History The history of the Sanhedrin is difficult to reconstruct. Jewish tradition recorded in the Mishnah views it as originating with Moses and his council of 70, but this is doubt...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56723,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:31","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:31-32<\/strong> Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, <em>judge him by your own law<\/em>. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • <em>fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die<\/em> (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:31-32<\/strong> Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, <em>judge him by your own law<\/em>. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • <em>fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die<\/em> (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:31-32 Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, judge him by your own law. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.","summary_en":"18:31-32 Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, judge him by your own law. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84349,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:31","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:31-32<\/strong> Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, <em>judge him by your own law<\/em>. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • <em>fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die<\/em> (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:31-32<\/strong> Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, <em>judge him by your own law<\/em>. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • <em>fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die<\/em> (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:31-32 Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, judge him by your own law. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.","summary_en":"18:31-32 Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, judge him by your own law. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111975,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:31","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:31-32<\/strong> Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, <em>judge him by your own law<\/em>. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • <em>fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die<\/em> (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:31-32<\/strong> Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, <em>judge him by your own law<\/em>. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • <em>fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die<\/em> (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:31-32 Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, judge him by your own law. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.","summary_en":"18:31-32 Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, judge him by your own law. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139601,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:31","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:31","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:31-32<\/strong> Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, <em>judge him by your own law<\/em>. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • <em>fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die<\/em> (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:31-32<\/strong> Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, <em>judge him by your own law<\/em>. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • <em>fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die<\/em> (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:31-32 Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, judge him by your own law. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.","summary_en":"18:31-32 Pilate found the charges unsatisfying and told the Sanhedrin, judge him by your own law. Pilate saw this as a Jewish squabble, which he refused to investigate. The Jewish leaders, however, insisted that an execution was necessary. • fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about the way he would die (see 12:32-33): The Jews would have employed stoning; the Romans used crucifixion. If Pilate delivered Jesus’ sentence, he would be crucified.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"33":[{"id":2331,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Apocrypha*","title_en":"Apocrypha*","content_ro":"<h3>APOCRYPHA*<\/h3>\n<p>Books excluded from the canon of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Apocryphal Gospels<\/p>\n<p>• Apocryphal Acts<\/p>\n<p>• Apocryphal Epistles<\/p>\n<p>• Apocalyptic Apocrypha<\/p>\n<p>• Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>The writings of the Old and New Testaments tended to attract certain additional compositions in the form of books, parts of books, letters, “gospels,” apocalypses, and so on. Most of the authors wrote anonymously, but some presented their writings to the public under the name of a familiar OT figure or member of the Christian church. Several of these compositions formed a small but important part of the great body of Jewish literature that emerged during the period between the Old and New Testaments. Much of it was the result of religious and political ferment, for the Jews felt their faith and their very existence threatened, first by the pagan influences of Hellenistic Greek culture, then by the oppression of invading Roman forces.<\/p>\n\n<p>Most of the apocryphal books are also pseudepigrapha—that is, they are books ascribed to a pseudonymous author. In other words, the main characteristic of these writings is the fictitious claim that the author of the book was a biblical person (Enoch, Abraham, Moses, Solomon, Bartholomew, Thomas, etc.) or that the revelation contained in the book was originally given to a biblical character (Adam and Eve, Isaiah). Generally, the pseudepigrapha show a strong interest in the apocalyptic: the creation of the world, the future of Israel and the nations, the glory of God and his angels, the messianic kingdom, and life after death. Many of the pseudepigrapha are Jewish writings that were never accepted by the Jewish or Christian communities. They were written about the time of the Apocrypha (c. 200 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 110), but by the nature of the contents of the pseudepigrapha, they were only recognized by certain groups. Since some of these books approximated counterparts in the canonical Scriptures, there is no doubt that in some circles their authority and inspiration were regarded as similar to that of the scriptural compositions venerated by the Jews and later by Christians.<\/p>\n<p>Other religious writings from that period made no claim to be scriptural. Such compositions preserved the familiar traditions of both Judaism and primitive Christianity, although on occasion they enriched or embellished them by means of legends and unhistorical narratives. Because very few books of any kind were in circulation at that time, the Palestinians tended to read whatever literary material came into their possession. Although the Torah, or law of Moses, had always been recognized as the standard of theological orthodoxy for the Jews, narratives of endurance under persecution or accounts of the way that the enemies of God’s people received their just reward had an obvious attraction for those under the pressures of a pagan society.<\/p>\n<p>In the same way, although the Gospels and Epistles—along with the OT—comprised the basic canon or approved list of Scriptures for Christians, many additional narratives claimed the attention of Christ’s early followers. Those compositions often dealt with the supposed activities of Jesus and his followers, as well as with martyrdoms, revelations, and spiritual teachings. Some works contained material that was not only unhistorical but downright bizarre, but others reflected the spirit of Christ and the apostolic teachings to a certain extent. For the early Christians, as also for the Jews, the establishment of a formal canon of scriptural writings must have been prompted in part by a necessity to separate the record of revealed truth from other written forms of religious tradition as well as from actual heresy.<\/p>\n<p>Writings that failed to gain acceptance into the OT and NT canons were described in the writings of some early Christian scholars by the term “apocrypha.” The Greek word means “hidden things,” and when applied to books it described those works that religious authorities wished to be concealed from the reading public. The reason was that such books were thought to contain mysterious or secret lore, meaningful only to the initiate and therefore unsuitable for the ordinary reader. But the word “apocrypha” was also applied in a less complimentary sense to works that deserved to be concealed. Such works contained harmful doctrines or false teachings calculated to unsettle or pervert rather than edify those who read them. The suppression of undesirable writings was comparatively easy at a time when only a few copies of any book were in circulation at a given time.<\/p>\n<p>By the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, a clear distinction was being made in Jewish circles between writings that were suitable for use by the general public and esoteric works that were to be restricted to the knowledgeable and the initiated. Thus in 2 Esdras 14:1-6, the writer tells how Ezra was supposedly instructed by God to publish openly certain writings (among them the Torah), and keep others secret (that is, apocalyptic traditions dealing with the coming end of the age). In 2 Esdras 14:42-46 reference is made to 70 books, evidently noncanonical material, written after the 24 books of the Hebrew Canon.<\/p>\n<p>Use of the term “apocrypha” to mean “noncanonical” goes back to the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>, when Jerome urged that the books found in the Septuagint and in the Latin Bibles that did not occur in the canon of the Hebrew OT writings should be treated as apocryphal. They were not to be disregarded entirely, since they were part of the great contemporary outpouring of Jewish national literature. At the same time, they should not be used as sources for Christian doctrine but at best for supplementary reading of an uplifting or inspirational nature.<\/p>\n<p>Protestant theologians generally have followed the tradition established by Jerome, regarding the OT apocrypha as the excess of the Septuagint canon over the Hebrew Scriptures. When the Hebrew Bible began to be translated into Greek in Egypt during the reign of Ptolemy II (285–246 <span>BC<\/span>), the scholars concerned included a number of books that, while remaining outside the generally accepted list of Hebrew canonical writings, still had a bearing upon Jewish history and society. That procedure reflected contemporary attitudes in Palestine, where many people did not attempt to separate canonical writings from other forms of religious literature. The decision made by Jewish authorities about what to regard as canonical Scripture naturally had a bearing on what would constitute OT apocrypha.<\/p>\n<p>Textual evidence represented by certain manuscripts and fragments from the Dead Sea caves makes it reasonably certain that the last of the canonical Hebrew writings had been completed several decades before the time Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>) began his conquests in the Near East. The process by which those compositions came to be accepted as canonical was more protracted, however. Only when they had been circulated, read, and assessed favorably by comparison with the spirituality of the Torah were they accorded general canonicity. Hence the distinction between the canonical and apocryphal writings came as much through usage and general consent on the part of orthodox Judaism as through any other manner. Earlier scholars suggested that the so-called Council of Jamnia, held in Palestine about <span>AD<\/span> 100, was responsible for drawing up a list of OT books suitable for use by the faithful. However, subsequent studies have thrown considerable doubt upon the historicity of such a council, at the same time showing that the Jewish authorities of that period considered their noncanonical writings to be more of an obstacle than a help to devotion.<\/p>\n<p>The books the Jews regarded as being specifically outside the Canon, and therefore apocryphal, are as follows: 1 Esdras; 2 Esdras; Tobit; Judith; the additions to Esther; the Wisdom of Solomon; Ecclesiasticus; Baruch; the Letter of Jeremiah; the additions to the book of Daniel (the Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon); the Prayer of Manasseh; 1 Maccabees; and 2 Maccabees. Several Septuagint manuscripts included some pseudohistorical material under the titles of 3 and 4 Maccabees. Therefore, even the Apocrypha varied somewhat in content, depending upon the manuscript tradition being followed. Among early Christian scholars there was also some difference of opinion about the precise limits of canonical Hebrew Scripture, and hence of apocryphal material. A serious break with Hebrew and rabbinic tradition came with the writings of Augustine, who advanced the view that the books of the Apocrypha were of equal authority with the other writings of the canonical Hebrew and Christian Scriptures. A few dissenting voices were raised in support of Jerome’s position, but the views of Augustine were embraced by the Council of Trent (1546) and became official Roman Catholic teaching.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church includes the following works as part of the Deuterocanonical Scriptures: Tobit; Judith; the additions to Esther; the Wisdom of Solomon; Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus ben Sirach; Baruch; the additions to the book of Daniel (the Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon); 1 Maccabees; and 2 Maccabees. (Articles on each of these are interspersed throughout this dictionary.)<\/p>\n<p>Christians of the NT period were already familiar with Jewish apocryphal works, including the apocalyptic speculations found in 2 Esdras. Therefore, it was hardly surprising that a similar body of literature should grow up around their own Scriptures when they began to be composed and circulated. NT apocrypha, however, like its OT counterpart, could be considered only in relationship to an established canon of scriptural writings. Since the earliest catalog of NT writings, the Muratorian Canon, was not compiled until about <span>AD<\/span> 200, a considerable period of time elapsed before an official church statement could appear on what was to be considered NT apocrypha. In the meantime, a large assortment of materials of a predominantly religious nature appeared, purporting to be orthodox in nature and dealing with various aspects of historic Christianity. As events turned out, this apocryphal literature defeated the purposes it was intended to serve.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApocryphalGospels\">Apocryphal Gospels<\/p>\n<p>One major class of apocrypha are the apocryphal gospels. These writings preserved stories about Christ and some teachings, but being mostly fanciful in nature they never became canonical. There are three broad classes:<\/p>\n<p>1. A type similar to the synoptic Gospels, represented by the Gospel of Peter and the Gospel of the Egyptians, as well as papyrus fragments including Oxyrhynchus 840 and Papyrus Egerton 2. Other papyrus collections of sayings show affinities with the canonical Gospels.<\/p>\n<li>2. Gospels that disseminated Gnosticism, a second-century <span>AD<\/span> heresy stressing philosophical knowledge <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>)<\/em> of the cosmos and man. They are often in the form of dialogues between Jesus and his disciples, such as the Coptic Gospel of Thomas, the Apocryphon of John, the Wisdom of Jesus Christ, and the Dialogue of the Redeemer. In this category also come those “gospels” attributed to the Twelve as a group, such as the Memoirs of the Apostles.<\/li>\n<li>3. Infancy gospels, purporting to supply otherwise unknown information of a legendary nature about Christ’s earliest years. Passion gospels also come into this category. These narratives were written to satisfy curiosity about Christ’s birth and childhood or to embellish the canonical accounts of his crucifixion and resurrection.<\/li>\n<p>Because of the scarcity of information about such matters as the childhood, adolescence, and early manhood of Jesus, the “infancy” gospels purport to supply the reader with what was meant to pass for historical fact. Much of the material, however, was entirely within the realm of fantasy and could never have been accepted as fact by any intelligent reader. For example, in the Gospel of Thomas the five-year-old Jesus is accused of breaking the Sabbath by making sparrows of clay beside a stream. When his father Joseph investigates the situation, Jesus claps his hands and the clay birds come to life and fly away chirping.<\/p>\n<p>“Passion” gospels were written to embellish the canonical accounts of Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection. As supplements to Christian teaching, many of the apocryphal writings seemed to be proclaiming ideas that were actually outside the scope of NT doctrine. Attempts to fill in the “hidden years” of Christ’s life had no foundation whatever in the traditions of the Gospels. Works dealing with the last state of unbelievers were embellished in a manner that went far beyond anything stated in the NT. In some notable instances, as in the writings of various Gnostic sects, the authors set out deliberately to propagate heretical teachings they had accepted under the authority of some apostolic figure. The Gospel of Thomas, recovered around 1945 from Nag Hammadi (Chenoboskion) near the Nile River, is an example of an attempt to perpetuate curious sayings and dogmas by attributing them to Jesus, so that they would receive wide currency and acceptance.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApocryphalActs\">Apocryphal Acts<\/p>\n<p>There are also some apocryphal acts, which are purported to be accounts of apostolic achievements not recorded in Scripture. Such “acts” are the source of much tradition, such as Peter’s being crucified upside down and Thomas’s mission to India. The reliability of the traditions is questionable because the writings contain clearly unorthodox material. Yet small fragments of accurate information may be embedded in this mass of largely fictitious literature.<\/p>\n<p>Because of their often heretical character, the church consistently reacted against such books, sometimes even demanding that they be burned (for example, at the Nicene Council of 787). The Acts of John pictured Jesus talking to John on the Mt of Olives during the crucifixion, explaining that it was only a spectacle. In the Acts of Thomas, Jesus appeared in the form of Thomas, exhorting a newly married couple to dedicate themselves to virginity. Sexual abstinence was a dominant theme, reflecting Platonic ideas, which disparaged the physical body.<\/p>\n<p>Many scholars date the earliest work, the Acts of John, before <span>AD<\/span> 150. The major Acts (of John, Paul, Peter, Andrew, and Thomas) were probably written during the second and third centuries. These gave rise to other “acts” that were primarily miracle stories, written more to entertain than to teach.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApocryphalEpistles\">Apocryphal Epistles<\/p>\n<p>A host of apocryphal works are classified as epistles. These generally pseudonymous works originated from many widely separated periods of time. Many other apocryphal works are apocalyptic in nature. These works are supplemented by material such as the Apostolic Constitutions and Canons. Added to these are the Gnostic compositions found at Nag Hammadi, which include works purporting to represent the teachings of Christ as well as “secret” instructions compiled by the Gnostic writers and a few apocryphal compositions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApocalypticApocrypha\">Apocalyptic Apocrypha<\/p>\n<p>Another group could be called apocalyptic apocrypha. The term “apocalypse” means “disclosure” or “revelation,” a term that was generally applied to Christian literature that resembled the Revelation of John, which designates itself an apocalypse in Revelation 1:1. The practice of writing under the name of an illustrious figure of the past, or pseudonymity, was a characteristic device used by most unknown authors of Jewish and Christian apocalypses (the Revelation of John is a striking exception). Jewish apocalypses were attributed to such ancient worthies as Adam, Enoch, Abraham, Moses, Ezra, and others. Similarly, Christian apocalypses written in the second century <span>AD<\/span> and later were ascribed to such important early Christian figures as Peter, Thomas, James and others.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times there emerged in Judaism certain circles that developed an apocalyptic view of history. They provided such writings as the five parts of 1 Enoch, the Assumption of Moses, 2 Esdras, and the Apocalypse of Baruch. These books are of importance to NT study, for they provide a bridge between the OT and the NT concepts of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>The apocalypses were written to answer the problems of theodicy (the justice of God). After the days of Ezra, the law assumed a more important role in the life of the people than before. In prophetic times Israel again and again apostatized from the law and worshiped foreign gods. The primary message of the prophets was to challenge Israel to get right with God and to turn in repentance to keep the law. After Ezra and throughout NT times, Israel was obedient to the law as never before. The Jews abhorred idolatry and faithfully worshiped God. Still the kingdom did not come. Instead came the fearful persecution in the Maccabean times by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the worldly rule of the Hasmoneans, Pompey and Roman hegemony, and in <span>AD<\/span> 66–70, the siege and destruction of Jerusalem. Where was God? Why did he not deliver his faithful people? Why did the kingdom not come? The apocalypses were written to answer questions like these.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most important elements in apocalyptic religion is an explicit dualism, expressed as “this age” and “the age to come.” The prophets contrasted the present time with the future when the kingdom of God would be established. The apocalyptists radicalized this contrast. Twice we find fragments of this idiom in 1 Enoch. We meet the fully developed idiom in 2 Esdras and the Apocalypse of Baruch (late first century <span>AD<\/span>). “The Most High has made not one age but two” (2 Esd 7:50); “the day of judgment shall be the end of this age and the beginning of the immortal age that is to come” (2 Esd 7:113); “this age the Most High has made for many but the age to come for few” (2 Esd 8:1; see also Apoc Bar 14:13; 15:7; <em>Pirke Aboth<\/em> 4:1, 21-22; 6:4-7). Furthermore, the transition from this age to the age to come can be accomplished only by a cosmic act of God. In the apocryphal Assumption of Moses there is no messianic personage; it is God alone who comes to redeem Israel. In the Similitudes of Enoch the transition is accomplished with the coming of a heavenly, preexistent Son of Man. In 2 Esdras we find a conflation of the concepts of Davidic Messiah and the Son of Man.<\/p>\n<p>Apocalyptic differs from OT prophetic religion in that it is pessimistic about the present age. It would be wrong to describe the apocalypses as ultimately pessimistic, for their basic message is that in due time God will intervene and save his people. But for the present, as long as this age lasts, he has removed himself from intervening in Israel’s affairs. The present age is under the power of evil angelic and demonic forces and is irretrievably evil. God has abandoned this age to evil; salvation can be expected only in the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The apocalyptists lost completely the tension between history and eschatology. They no longer expected any deliverance in this age. God had, in fact, become the God of the future, not of the present.<\/p>\n<p>In the dream-visions of Enoch (1 Enoch 83–90), God faithfully guided Israel throughout its history. Then God withdrew his personal leadership, forsook the temple, and surrendered his people to be torn and devoured. God “remained unmoved, though he saw it, and rejoiced that they were devoured and swallowed and robbed, and left them to be devoured in the hand of all the beasts” (1 Enoch 89:58). After the Babylonian captivity God was conceived to be inactive in history. History was surrendered to evil. All salvation was thrust into the future.<\/p>\n<p>Comparative studies have shown that the NT apocryphal writings preserve at best a series of debased traditions about the founder and teachings of early Christianity. At worst, the narratives are entirely devoid of historical value and in some respects are totally alien to NT spirituality. Even where they seem to support a tradition current in some part of the early church, the evidence they present is inferior to what can often be had from other sources. Sometimes the compositions are so trivial and inconsequential that it is difficult to account for their survival. Certain apocryphal writings did in fact become lost and are now known only in the form of quotations in larger works.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, the NT apocryphal compositions are important in indicating what was attractive to the ordinary people of the day. For them an element of the romantic seemed necessary to supplement the body of received spiritual truth. Certain of the stories recounted were vivid and imaginative, and others, such as the apocalypses, provided a form of escapism from harsh temporal realities. No matter what their nature, the NT apocryphal writings exerted an influence out of all proportion to their fundamental worth.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SpecificTitlesofApocryphalWritings\">Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AbdiasApostolicHistoryof\">Abdias, Apostolic History of<\/p>\n<p>Collection of material drawn from canonical and apocryphal writings concerning the lives of the apostles, including Paul. Abdias, an early bishop of Babylon, was supposedly the author of this history that more probably was collated from a variety of sources in the sixth century <span>AD<\/span> in France. This apocryphal “acts,” divided into 10 books, originally circulated in Greek as individual volumes that were collected into one when a Latin version was made. The content is generally regarded as folklore or legend but is of some value where no other source is available.<\/p>\n<p>Abdias, a contemporary of the apostles, may have seen Christ and supposedly traveled extensively with Simon and Jude. There is no historical basis for considering Abdias as the author of the Hebrew text, or for believing that his disciple Eutropius translated it into Greek or that Africanus translated the Greek into Latin—although the preface to the Latin version makes those claims.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AbgarusLettersofChristand\">Abgarus, Letters of Christ and<\/p>\n<p>Apocryphal work comprising two short letters, one supposedly written by the Syrian king Abgar (Abgarus), the other supposedly a reply from Jesus. Eusebius claimed to have found the material in the archives of Abgar at Edessa and translated it from Syrian to Greek together with an account of the exploits of the disciple Thaddaeus.<\/p>\n<p>According to the legend, Abgar, suffering from a severe disease, hears of the miracles of Jesus and sends a messenger with a letter asking Jesus to come heal him. At the same time he offers Jesus sanctuary from the dangerous opposition of the Jews in Jerusalem. In a written reply (later altered to an oral one to comply with the tradition that no writings of Jesus existed), Jesus declines the offer of sanctuary but promises that after his ascension he will comply with Abgar’s request for healing by sending a disciple to him. Thaddaeus, one of the Twelve, is dispatched to Edessa, the king is healed, and the community converts to Christianity. In a slightly different version in the Doctrina Addaei (about <span>AD<\/span> 400), an oral reply is given, and the messenger returns with a portrait of Jesus that is displayed prominently in Abgar’s palace.<\/p>\n<p>The legend is essentially similar to that described in the Greek Acts of Thaddaeus (fifth or sixth century <span>AD<\/span>), except that in the latter Ananias returns with a handkerchief on which is a miraculous imprint of the face of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AbrahamApocalypseof\">Abraham, Apocalypse of<\/p>\n<p>Jewish document existing in old Slavonic texts that go back through Greek to a Hebrew or Aramaic original.<\/p>\n<p>The Apocalypse of Abraham begins with Abraham turning from idolatry. Incorporating old rabbinical traditions of Abraham’s youth, it describes his awakening to the call of God and his awareness that God was one and was holy. An angel named Jahoel, whose functions and powers are lifted from rabbinical lore, takes Abraham to the seventh heaven where he is shown things past and things yet to be. He sees the temptation of Adam and Eve through sexual sin, and the murder of Cain. Azazel, an evil being, plays Satan’s role. These details probably reflect a tradition that Abraham was the author of the first documents of the Bible. The revelation then turns to the future and shows the destruction of the temple, plagues upon the heathen, and the coming of the Messiah. It is probable that the composite document took final form in the last generation of the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>True to his character as revealed in Genesis, Abraham raises the question of evil and why God tolerates the rebellious Azazel. He receives the answer that evil has its origin in the free will of man. This apocalypse shows how faithful Jews struggled to understand the problem of evil during a time of great suffering in Judaism. It also illustrates the curious “doctrine of angels” of that period. Both Gnostic and Christian editing of the text has been noted by some scholars.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AbrahamTestamentof\">Abraham, Testament of<\/p>\n<p>Jewish apocryphal writing describing the death of Abraham. In the testament, when the angel Michael comes to take Abraham’s soul, Abraham refuses to die. Reluctant to insist on the old man’s death, Michael accedes to his request to see all creation before he dies. The angel transports Abraham by chariot into the heavens so that he can observe mankind. Abraham is so shocked at the perfidy of humanity that he curses the sinners, who die immediately. He then observes the judgment of a soul, and although angels take part in the trial he notes that the presiding judge is Abel. The merits and demerits of the soul seem equally balanced, but because of the intervention of Abraham, the judgment is favorable. Abraham then realizes the severity of his cursing of sinners, but the angel informs him that the premature death of those whom he had cursed was the means of atonement for their sins.<\/p>\n<p>After his return to earth, Abraham again refuses to die. Death appears in all his horror and kills 7,000 servants of Abraham (who are subsequently raised to life), but the aged saint still will not die. Finally, Death grasps Abraham’s hand and the angels lift his spirit to the heavens.<\/p>\n<p>The account is found in several Greek manuscripts, the oldest perhaps dating from the 13th century <span>AD<\/span>, as well as in Slavonic, Romanian, Arabic, Ethiopic, and Coptic. The original language was probably Hebrew, from the first century <span>AD<\/span>, with the work possibly translated into Greek by a Christian. The testament also exists in a shorter version in which God comes to lift up the soul of Abraham during a dream. There is no attempt in the work to make a theological statement, but the portrayal of the angel Michael and of Death are typical of Jewish thought of the first century.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ActsApocryphal\">Acts, Apocryphal<\/p>\n<p>Writings purported to be accounts of apostolic achievements not recorded in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ActsofPilate\">Acts of Pilate<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Pilate, Acts of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AdamApocalypseof\">Adam, Apocalypse of<\/p>\n<p>One of the best examples of Gnostic apocalyptic literature. In 1946, a farm worker discovered a number of ancient texts in a cave about 6 miles (10 kilometers) north of the Egyptian city of Nag Hammadi. The discovery included 13 codexes (predecessors of bound books) of Christian and non-Christian origin. The discovery was not immediately disclosed, so it was not until 1958 that a French scholar, Jean Doresse, revealed the existence of the Apocalypse of Adam to the public. The apocalypse is written in Coptic and stands as the last of five works in Codex V.<\/p>\n<p>Although the author’s true identity is unknown, the subtitle spuriously attributes the book to Adam or Seth: “An Apocalypse that Adam revealed to his son Seth in the seven hundredth year.” Seth was often cast in the role of transmitter of truth by the writers of Gnostic literature (for example, the Gospel of the Egyptians, the Paraphrase of Shem).<\/p>\n<p>The earliest existing copy of the Apocalypse of Adam is dated around <span>AD<\/span> 300 to 350, although it may have been written long before. Its frequent Gnostic references, its dependence on Jewish history, and its allusions to baptism have led some scholars to postulate an origin in the Jewish baptist sects of the first and second centuries. Parallels also exist between this work and third-century Manichean (a brand of Gnosticism) literature.<\/p>\n<p>The Apocalypse of Adam is of great importance to students of Christian origins. For many years scholars have debated whether the Gnostic religion was a heretical outgrowth of Christianity or whether it was a movement of independent origins. Some scholars have argued that the Apocalypse of Adam is an example of an early, independent Gnosticism. If this proves to be the case the debate will certainly be simplified.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to its introduction and conclusion, the Apocalypse of Adam may be divided into three parts: Adam’s summary of significant past events, predictions of attempts to eliminate mankind by the evil creator-god, and predictions about the coming of the Enlightener who will show his people the way to the true God.<\/p>\n<p>The apocalypse opens with Adam, supposedly on his deathbed, revealing the future secrets of the Gnostic people to Seth. These have been mystically communicated to him by three angelic beings. Adam bemoans his condition of perpetual slavery to the evil creator-god, brought about by the fall and mankind’s subsequent loss of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span> (knowledge). Typical of Gnostic literature, a sharp distinction is drawn between the evil creator-god who rules the earth and the true God of the universe, knowledge of whom brings authentic life. Adam predicts that the creator-god will jealously attempt to destroy mankind by a flood (the story of Noah) and by fire (the story of Sodom and Gomorrah) and thus keep mankind from knowledge of the true God. These attempts, however, will be foiled by the intervention of angelic beings sent from the God of truth. Finally, the true God will send the Enlightener who will teach <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span> to mankind so that they might know him. The creator-god will try to defeat the Enlightener but will be able to harm only his physical body. With the message of the Enlightener prevailing, mankind will turn from the creator-god and seek the true God through <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gnosticism.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AdamApocryphalBooksof\">Adam, Apocryphal Books of<\/p>\n<p>Account of the life and death of Adam and Eve recorded in Latin, and in a Greek version known as the Apocalypse of Moses. Other minor versions of early Christian origin also exist. Like other apocryphal writings, the work is fanciful and of unknown authorship.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Latin account, after their expulsion from Paradise Adam and Eve are hungry and unable to find food for seven days. In desperation a penitent Eve, assuming responsibility for tasting the forbidden fruit, suggests that Adam kill her. He refuses, and after a search they survive by eating animals’ food. Adam suggests that as a penance they should stand fasting in the river up to their necks for 40 days, he in the Tigris, she in the Jordan. After 18 days Satan comes to Eve in the guise of an angel, tells her that the Lord has accepted her penance, and persuades her to leave the river. Coming to the Tigris where Adam is, Eve realizes that it was Satan who had spoken to her. Satan then explains that the reason for his fall was his refusal to worship man, a lower being.<\/p>\n<p>The archangel Michael is then sent to Adam with seeds so that he can learn to till the land. In a dream Eve sees Cain kill Abel, and in an attempt to prevent the murder by separating the brothers, Cain is made a farmer and Abel a shepherd. Subsequently a third son, Seth, is born. Adam receives a message from God that he is to die because he has obeyed the word of his wife rather than the instructions of God. When Adam is later in pain and close to death, he explains to Seth that Satan had tempted Eve to eat the forbidden fruit and that she in turn had persuaded him to taste it. Seth and Eve journey to the gates of Paradise to plead with God for Adam’s life. On the way Seth is attacked and bitten by a snake. At Paradise, Michael explains to them that Adam must die. Seth observes the burial of Adam and Abel.<\/p>\n<p>Before Eve’s death the following week, she asks Seth to make a record of the lives of his parents on tablets of stone and clay, so that if the Lord shows his anger with the world by water, the clay will be dissolved and the stone remain; if by fire, the stone will be broken up and the clay baked hard. Eve also warns Seth to mourn for six days only and not on the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Greek version is similar to that of the Latin, except that the Greek version includes a description of Adam’s resurrection (added later to the Latin) and a detailed account by Eve of her temptation and fall. The burial of Adam and the initial refusal of the earth to accept the body of the slain Abel are also elaborately described in the Greek account. Both versions are probably derived from Hebrew originals dating from the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AhikarBookof\">Ahikar, Book of<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern folktale from the sixth or seventh century <span>BC<\/span> showing the reward of ingratitude. According to the story, Ahikar, secretary of Sennacherib, king of Assyria, was renowned for his wisdom. Childless even though he had 60 wives, Ahikar adopted his sister’s son, Nadan, and reared him to be his successor in Sennacherib’s court. Ahikar diligently educated his adopted son, who nevertheless turned out to be bad and even forged documents to have his benefactor condemned to death. Ahikar was spared through his friendship with the executioner and was concealed until the wrath of the king cooled. Later, when Sennacherib had occasion to wish for his wisdom, Ahikar was brought on the scene, long-haired, disheveled, and with fingernails like eagles’ claws. Once again in the king’s favor, Ahikar sternly rebuked his unscrupulous nephew. In response to Ahikar’s rebuke, Nadan’s body swelled up and his stomach burst open.<\/p>\n<p>Ahikar’s story has interesting parallels with OT wisdom books and also with some of the parables of Jesus. References to Ahikar occur in the apocryphal book of Tobit, in the Greek philosopher Democritus, in the apocalyptic Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, as well as in the Koran. The story, originally in Aramaic, also survives in Syriac, Arabic, Armenian, Ethiopic, and Greek, though with considerable variations in the versions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AkhmimFragment\">Akhmim Fragment<\/p>\n<p>Document found in a tomb in Akhmim in Egypt and containing the apocryphal Gospel of Peter. <em>See<\/em> Peter, Preaching of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AllogenesSupreme\">Allogenes Supreme<\/p>\n<p>Gnostic work (“The Most High Stranger”), discovered in 1946 in an urn near Nag Hammadi (Egypt). The Neoplatonist historian Porphyry, as well as later Syriac Christian writings against heresy, mentioned the works of Allogenes (whose name means “foreigner” or “stranger”). Allogenes Supreme, a Gnostic “apocalypse” written in Coptic, contains an account of the creation of the higher world, exalting Barbelo, the celestial mother. The existing copy was made during the fourth century, but the original may date back to the second century.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AndrewActsof\">Andrew, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>Apocryphal work describing purported miracles and the martyrdom in Greece of the apostle Andrew, Peter’s brother. Its theme is the virtue of turning away from materialism and the transitory values of the world to an asceticism associated with dedication of life to God. The earliest fragment available is in the Vatican. The original probably dated from the second century <span>AD<\/span> and was probably long, verbose, and tedious. Feeling that it had merit, Gregory of Tours in the sixth century wrote a concise account of the miracles of Andrew from an original, now lost. The account of the martyrdom of Andrew probably circulated separately.<\/p>\n<p>Among the many miracles Gregory recorded was one concerning Exoos, a noble youth from Thessalonica, who, having heard of Andrew’s preaching and miracles, comes to him at Philippi, is converted, and remains with him. Finding bribery useless and refusing to listen to Andrew, the youth’s parents set fire to the house where the Christians are staying. As the flames roar, Exoos prays that the Lord will extinguish the fire and sprinkles it with water. Thereupon the flames die out. The parents and the crowd, claiming that the youth is now a sorcerer, climb ladders to enter the house and kill the inhabitants, but God blinds the intruders. Although it is night, a light shines out from the house, sight is restored to those who have been blinded, and all except the youth’s parents are converted. The parents die soon afterward, and Exoos remains with Andrew, spending his inheritance on the poor. Returning to Thessalonica, Exoos heals a man who has been paralyzed for 23 years, and subsequently Exoos and Andrew perform further miracles and preach to the people.<\/p>\n<p>In Patrae the maidservant of Maximilla, wife of the proconsul Aegeates, comes to Andrew and implores him to heal her mistress, whose fever is so severe that her husband is standing at her bedside threatening to kill himself with a sword the moment she dies. Telling the proconsul to put up his sword, Andrew takes Maximilla’s hand and the fever leaves her. Ordering food for her, Andrew then refuses Aegeates’ offer of 100 pieces of silver. After performing many miracles in the city, Andrew receives a message from Maximilla to come and heal the slave of the proconsul’s brother, Stratocles. The apostle restores the boy to health, and his master believes.<\/p>\n<p>Maximilla, to the fury of her husband, spends considerable time listening to the preaching of Andrew and is also converted. She then refuses to sleep with her husband and one night even substitutes a servant for herself. Details of subsequent events are found in the account of the martyrdom. Aegeates, in anger, holds Andrew responsible for his wife’s alienation and has him arrested. After preaching from prison, Andrew is taken to be crucified by the seashore. When the Christian Stratocles sees Andrew being manhandled by the soldiers, he fights his way through, and he and Andrew walk together to the place of crucifixion. Aegeates, fearing his brother, orders the soldiers not to interfere. At the seashore the soldiers follow the proconsul’s command that Andrew be tied, not nailed, to the cross so that his death will be lingering and he will be eaten by dogs. After two days he is still speaking to people from the cross, and many come to Aegeates demanding Andrew’s release. Arriving at the scene, the proconsul sees that Andrew is indeed alive, and Aegeates approaches the apostle to release him. Andrew demands that he be allowed to die and meet his Lord. As they watch, Andrew dies and the onlookers weep as Maximilla and Stratocles take down his body from the cross. Maximilla remains apart from her husband and continues as a Christian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AndrewStoryof\">Andrew, Story of<\/p>\n<p>Legendary fragment existing only in the Coptic language. In the legend coming from the late second century <span>AD<\/span>, a woman kills her child in the desert and gives the remains to a dog. She flees when the apostle Andrew and Philemon approach, but the dog tells what happened. Andrew prays and the child, being vomited forth, is restored to life and laughs and cries.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AndrewandMatthiasActsof\">Andrew and Matthias, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>Lengthy document of highly questionable authenticity, probably dating from the late second century <span>AD<\/span>. This book was one of many apocryphal “acts” intended to supplement the NT book of Acts by providing more information about the apostles. The fourth-century church historian Eusebius described this work and others like it as heretical, absurd, and spurious.<\/p>\n<p>In this story, the apostles cast lots to determine where each should go. Matthias (Matthew in some versions) is sent to the country of the man-eaters, where he soon requires rescue from a cannibal feast. The Lord then sends Andrew to save him. Andrew arrives in time to do so, and Matthias is then carried off by a cloud. Now alone, Andrew is arrested and tortured, being dragged through the city that he nearly destroys by calling forth water from a statue. Eventually, impressed by Andrew’s miracles, the people repent and release him. Andrew next draws a plan for a church, has it built, baptizes the people, and gives them the ordinances of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AndrewandPaulActsof\">Andrew and Paul, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>Fragmentary apocryphal story, existing only in Coptic fragments, about the arrival of the apostles Andrew and Paul by sea at a city. In the story, Paul, instructing Andrew to rescue him, visits the underworld. There he meets Judas, who explains that he worshiped Satan after Jesus had pardoned him for the betrayal. Andrew rescues Paul, who returns carrying a piece of wood. Although Andrew is asked to heal a child, some Jews are skeptical and the city gates remain closed to the apostles. Paul strikes the gates with his piece of wood, and the gates are swallowed up into the earth. Astonished at the miracle, 27,000 Jews are converted.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ApostlesEpistleofthe\">Apostles, Epistle of the<\/p>\n<p>Letter purporting to come from the 11 apostles to the churches “of the east and the west, of the north and the south, declaring and imparting to you that which concerns our Lord Jesus Christ.” Some believe that the epistle was written in Asia Minor about <span>AD<\/span> 160; others think that it originated in Egypt. It is probably to be dated near the middle of the second century. In existence are a mutilated Coptic manuscript of the fourth or fifth century, a complete version in Ethiopic, and a fragment in Latin. The epistle was unknown until the discovery in 1895 of the Coptic manuscript.<\/p>\n<p>After an introduction there is a declaration that “our Lord and Redeemer Jesus Christ is God the Son of God who was sent of God the Lord of the whole world.” Then follows a summary of a number of incidents from the Gospels, including a negative statement of the Golden Rule: “Love your enemies, and what you would not that man do to you, that do to no man.” Chapter 24 introduces the subject of the resurrection followed by a series of questions by the disciples with answers by Jesus. A prophecy of the conversion of Paul appears in chapter 31. In chapter 43 the five wise virgins are identified as “Faith and Love and Grace and Peace and Hope”; the names of the foolish are “Knowledge, Understanding (Perception), Obedience, Patience, and Compassion.” The question-and-answer format of a substantial part of the work is reminiscent of the style of some of the texts found in the Gnostic library at Nag Hammadi, especially the Apocryphon of John. However, warnings that Cerinthus and Simon (ch 7) are “enemies of our Lord Jesus Christ” make it clear that this is not a Gnostic document. The epistle contains numerous evidences of orthodox influence, along with clear indications of a departure from apostolic Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ApostlesGospeloftheTwelve\">Apostles, Gospel of the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>One of a large number of heretical “gospels” circulating in the earliest centuries of the Christian church along with the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The Gospel of the Twelve Apostles was first mentioned by name in comments on Luke 1:1 by the Christian theologian Origen (c. <span>AD<\/span> 185–254). Some scholars think it may have been the same as the Gospel of the Ebionites, quoted in a few early Christian writings. Nothing is known directly of the Gospel of the Twelve Apostles.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ArabicGospeloftheInfancy\">Arabic Gospel of the Infancy<\/p>\n<p>One of several “gospels of the infancy” found in the apocryphal NT. This one from about the fifth century contains an account of the birth of Jesus, including the visits of the shepherds and the magi, the flight into Egypt, and miracles performed by Jesus as a boy. Details of the early period of Jesus’ life are given, about which the canonical Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) say nothing. An interesting facet of the miracle stories is the role in many of them of Mary, the mother of Jesus, in contrast to the record of the miracles in the canonical Gospels. The Arabic Gospel may have been written in Syriac and translated into Arabic. Some of its stories are also found in the Koran and other Islamic writings. Study of this apocryphal gospel reveals its sharp contrast with the canonical accounts, but it also indicates how much this and similar writings had to do with the growing veneration of the virgin Mary.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ArabicHistoryofJosephtheCarpenter\">Arabic History of Joseph the Carpenter<\/p>\n<p>Fourth-century <span>AD<\/span> account of the life and death of Joseph—with information supposedly supplied by Jesus. According to this account, Joseph the carpenter becomes a widower after fathering four sons and two daughters (ch 2). He is entrusted with the care of Mary in his 90th year (ch 14). Thus, according to this account, the brothers and sisters of Jesus are Joseph’s children by a previous marriage. Joseph is said to have died at the age of 111 years. The document, which exists in both Arabic and Coptic versions, contains the statement that Mary “must look for the same end of life as other mortals” (ch 18). Hence, it has been dated as earlier than the fifth century, when the idea of the “assumption of Mary into heaven” was being promoted.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AristeasLetterof\">Aristeas, Letter of<\/p>\n<p>Early account of the relationships between Judaism and Hellenism in Egypt during the period when the Hebrew OT was translated into Greek (the Septuagint). The author, Aristeas, who identifies himself as an Alexandrian court attendant under Ptolemy Philadelphus II (ruled 283–247 <span>BC<\/span>), purports to give information about the translation procedures. The most probable date for the Letter of Aristeas (estimates vary from 200 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 50) is the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>As part of his massive library project, King Ptolemy shows interest in the Jewish law. Aristeas uses the occasion to request the emancipation with remuneration of all Jewish slaves in the kingdom and King Ptolemy accedes to the request. The king asks that the high priest in Jerusalem select translators for the project. There follows a lengthy description of gifts sent to Eleazar, the high priest, with special emphasis upon an exquisite table. And then Aristeas describes the temple, the priests, the vestments of the high priest, and the defense system for the temple, followed by a brief description of Palestine and its environs.<\/p>\n<p>In the next section, the high priest talks with Aristeas and the translators before their departure to Alexandria. A summary of his speech includes a careful defense of the law from a philosophical viewpoint. The king gives a lavish banquet for the 72 translators (6 from each tribe) when they arrive in Alexandria. Each translator gives a brilliant answer to the king’s specific questions at the seven successive nights of celebration. The name of each translator and his question and answer are recorded. Then the work is completed on the island of Pharos in 72 days and is praised by the Alexandrian Jews and the king. The translators are dismissed with lavish gifts.<\/p>\n<p>In the epilogue, the author claims to have been an eyewitness to the events and maintains that his report is accurate. This is not believed by modern scholars. Its embellished and legendary quality was recognized in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. Aristeas’s discussion of the translation procedure was obviously a convenient literary frame on which to hang a defense of Judaism to the heathen world. Religious liberalism and loyalty to basic Jewish beliefs were skillfully combined to plead for political toleration for the Jews. Many specifics of the Letter of Aristeas are questionable, but its basic picture of how the Septuagint translation came to be made is credible. <em>See<\/em> the discussion of the Septuagint in Bible, Versions of the (Ancient).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ArmenianGospeloftheInfancy\">Armenian Gospel of the Infancy<\/p>\n<p>Legendary account of the infancy and boyhood of Jesus Christ, one of many apocryphal gospels intended to supplement the four NT Gospels by providing more details about Jesus’ early life. It was probably translated into Armenian from a Syriac original. Nestorian missionaries reportedly brought an “infancy gospel” into Armenia about <span>AD<\/span> 590, but evidently not the Armenian Gospel in its present form.<\/p>\n<p>Sources for the Armenian Gospel included two books containing legendary material about Christ’s infancy, the Protevangelium of James and the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. The Armenian Gospel amplifies the material of these two texts considerably, making many novel additions to the life of Jesus. For example, Joseph searches for a midwife and meets Eve, who has come to witness the fulfillment of the promised Redeemer-seed (Gn 3:15). Later the magi bring the testament Adam gave to Seth. Jesus, accused of causing a child’s death, is cleared when the child is raised from the dead.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AscensionofIsaiah\">Ascension of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Isaiah, Ascension of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AscentsofJames\">Ascents of James<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> James, Ascents of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AsenathPrayerof\">Asenath, Prayer of<\/p>\n<p>Jewish story about the wife of Joseph when he was in Egypt (Gn 41:45) and known by several titles—The Life and Confession of Asenath, The Book of Joseph and Asenath, and variations of the above. It was apparently very popular in the early and medieval Christian church. Latin, Syriac, Slavonic, Rumanian, and Ethiopic versions, in addition to 40 Armenian copies, have been found.<\/p>\n<p>Modern scholars tend to see the source of the novel in the Hellenistic Judaism prevalent in Egypt from 100 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 100. Asenath seems to serve as a model for any proselyte to Judaism. If that understanding is correct, the story gives valuable insight into the less legalistic attitudes of a sector of pre-Christian Judaism. Repentant realization of the hopelessness of one’s sinful condition and casting oneself upon the mercies of God play a large part in the story.<\/p>\n<p>The original was probably written in Greek and is divided into two major parts. Part I deals with Asenath’s pampered life prior to meeting Joseph, his initial rejection of her because of her idolatry, and her consequent repentance in ashes. Asenath calls upon God in prayer, and he sends an angel to her to announce her forgiveness and to say that her name is now written in the Book of Life. Joseph returns and marvels at Asenath’s new beauty, rejoicing at her conversion. With Pharaoh’s blessing they are married the next day.<\/p>\n<p>Part II describes the period when Joseph’s father, Jacob, and his family have come to Egypt. Desiring Asenath, the elder son of Pharaoh tempts Joseph’s brothers Dan and Gad to help him kidnap her. The plan is foiled by Joseph’s other brothers, who then wish to kill Dan and Gad, but Asenath pleads successfully for their lives. Pharaoh leaves the crown to Joseph, who rules 40 years and then returns the reign to Pharaoh’s younger son.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AsherTestamentof\">Asher, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AssumptionofMoses\">Assumption of Moses<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Moses, Assumption of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BarnabasActsof\">Barnabas, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>Document of one of several distinct cycles of tradition about Barnabas, the apostle Paul’s companion, this one linking him with Cyprus. This work, whose full title is The Journeyings and Martyrdom of Saint Barnabas the Apostle, was probably composed in Cyprus at the end of the fifth or the beginning of the sixth century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The book purports to be a first-person account written by John Mark. He claims to have left the apostles in Perga (cf. Acts 13:13) so he could sail to the West but was prevented. When he tried to rejoin them in Antioch, Paul prohibited him. Consequently, after some dispute, John Mark and Barnabas sailed for Cyprus. After preaching and healing many people, Barnabas encountered his old adversary, Bar-Jesus, who finally stirred up the Jews to capture him. Leading Barnabas out of the city of Salamis, they circled around him and burned him alive. John Mark and some other believers escaped with his ashes and buried them in a cave along with scriptures Barnabas had received from Matthew. John Mark then left for Alexandria to minister there.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BarnabasEpistleof\">Barnabas, Epistle of<\/p>\n<p>This anonymous letter addresses a question commonly asked throughout the early church: What should Christianity’s relationship be to Judaism? Clement of Alexandria quoted from this document frequently and ascribed it to “Barnabas, who himself also preached with the apostle [Paul].” Jerome believed the same. But the writer does not claim to be Barnabas, and the earliest claims of authorship come only from Alexandrian church leaders. The literary and interpretive style is entirely Alexandrian, so it is assumed that the epistle was written in Alexandria.<\/p>\n<p>The author of this epistle unequivocally denies any connection between Judaism and the gospel of Jesus Christ. At the same time, he does not say that the OT opposes the NT; rather, he sees Christianity everywhere in the Law and the Prophets. He holds that all the Judaistic rites and ceremonies are mystical pointers to Christ and that an evil angel has blinded the Jews from understanding this.<\/p>\n<p>The epistle mentions the destruction of Jerusalem, so it was not written before <span>AD<\/span> 70. There was a second devastation of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 132 that ended the revolt of Bar-Kochba. This defeat would have served the author’s purposes so well that he would surely have referred to it if he were writing after the event. Many scholars suggest that the letter was composed around 130, since this was a period of strong Jewish nationalism. This nationalism would have pressured many Jewish Christians to return to Judaism, and so the author of the Epistle of Barnabas wrote to defend Christianity against Judaism.<\/p>\n<p>The Epistle of Barnabas is composed of two parts. The first section (chs 1–17) contains allegorical interpretations of the OT. These highly spiritual and mystical interpretations are intended to oppose Jewish legalism and explain how the OT prophesied of Jesus Christ. The author concedes that righteous people, such as Moses, David, and the prophets, understood the true meaning of Mosaic law, but he contends that the rest of the nation of Israel had misconstrued God’s covenant. Therefore, the Jews lost their claim to the covenant’s blessings, which were transferred to the Christians instead. This allegorical style of interpretation was very popular among Alexandrian church leaders. The NT epistle of Hebrews also makes use of this type of interpretation. The author of the Epistle of Barnabas often quotes from the Septuagint, though the quotes are somewhat loosely recited.<\/p>\n<p>A Latin version of the first section was all that was known of the Epistle of Barnabas until the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus in 1859. This codex contained the first known Greek version of the Epistle of Barnabas, which was appended to the books of the NT along with The Shepherd and the Didache. The Greek version contains a second section that begins, “Now let us pass on to quite a different sort of instruction.” This section contains moral precepts that contrast the way of darkness with the way of light, much of which seems to be transcribed from the “Two Ways” of the Didache. It has little connection with the first section. This has led many scholars to conclude that the second section was added by another writer at some later date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BarnabasGospelof\">Barnabas, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>Long Italian work actually written in the fourth century by a proselyte to Islam. He probably sought to capitalize on the mysterious mention of such a gospel in the Gelasian Decree, written not later than the sixth century <span>AD<\/span>. To date, no other evidence of an authentic gospel by Barnabas has been uncovered, a fact that has led many scholars to doubt whether it ever existed.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BartholomewActsof\">Bartholomew, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian novel purporting to describe the last days and death of the apostle Bartholomew. The work is also known as The Martyrdom of the Holy and Glorious Apostle Bartholomew. It may date back to the fifth or sixth century <span>AD<\/span> and was evidently well received, for copies exist in Latin, Greek, Armenian, and Ethiopic.<\/p>\n<p>In the Acts, Bartholomew goes to India, takes up residence in a pagan temple, and causes its false oracle to cease. Bartholomew then heals a demoniac, thus drawing the attention of King Polymius. Bartholomew also heals the king’s demon-possessed daughter. Next, he casts the false god out of the temple. After this display of power, many believe the gospel. The king’s brother, however, is enraged and has Bartholomew beaten and beheaded. His rash action is soon punished, for he is strangled to death by a demon. The good King Polymius becomes bishop and serves 20 years.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BartholomewApocalypseof\">Bartholomew, Apocalypse of<\/p>\n<p>Fragmentary Coptic texts that have some similarities to the apocryphal Gospel of Bartholomew. A few scholars have felt that two works were represented in these fragments, a gospel and also an apocalypse. Though this hypothesis has been generally abandoned, references to the debatable Apocalypse of Bartholomew still appear.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bartholomew, Gospel of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BartholomewBookoftheResurrectionofChristby\">Bartholomew, Book of the Resurrection of Christ by<\/p>\n<p>Apocryphal work existing only in Coptic and probably dating from the fifth or sixth century <span>AD<\/span>. Like many similar writings of doubtful authenticity, it claims to supplement the accounts of Jesus found in the biblical Gospels. The book was supposedly addressed by Bartholomew to his son, Thaddaeus, who was warned in it not to let this book “come into the hand of any man who is an unbeliever and a heretic.” The book can hardly be regarded as a narrative; its aim is obviously the glorification of Bartholomew, who sees things that are hidden from others. The text contains many breaks; contradictions abound and a disregard of history is evident. Two different persons bury the body of Jesus: Joseph and Philogenes, father of a boy healed by Jesus. Mary, the mother of Jesus, is confused with Mary Magdalene. In the account of the Last Supper the author goes far beyond biblical statements about the bread and wine: “His Body was on the Table about which they were assembled; and they divided it. They saw the blood of Jesus pouring out as living blood down into the cup.” Imaginative details also embellish the account of the resurrection. Christ, for example, brings Adam back with him from hades. The story of doubting Thomas has been greatly amplified.<\/p>\n<p>The most complete text of the Book of the Resurrection is in the British Museum in London. Several other fragments exist, probably from an earlier version.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BartholomewGospelOf\">Bartholomew, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>One of many apocryphal gospels appearing after the second century under the name of some illustrious figure. The early church was aware not only of the existence of these writings but also of their fictitious character. In the fourth century the church historian Eusebius described them as heretical, spurious, absurd, and impious. Later a Gospel of Bartholomew was mentioned by name, along with several other Gnostic gospels, in the prologue of Jerome’s commentary on Matthew’s Gospel. However, there is no evidence that Jerome had seen such a book or that it actually existed.<\/p>\n<p>A work called Questions of Bartholomew does exist in Greek, Latin, and Slavonic texts—the Greek dating possibly from the fifth or sixth century. Its text has Bartholomew asking Jesus where he went after the Crucifixion and Jesus telling him that he went into hades. Later Bartholomew is pictured as asking Mary to tell how she conceived the incomprehensible or bore him that cannot be carried. Mary warns him that if she began to tell them, fire would come forth from her mouth and consume all the world, but the apostle persists. As she tells the story of the angelic visitation and the Annunciation, fire comes from her mouth. The world is about to come to an end, but Jesus intervenes and places his hand over Mary’s mouth. The apostles also ask to see the bottomless pit and “the things which are in the heavens.” Bartholomew is shown the adversary of men, Beliar, restrained by 660 angels and bound with fiery chains. When Bartholomew treads upon his neck, Beliar explains that he had first been called Satanael and later Satan, describes the creation of the angels, and tells how he fell and how he was able to deceive Eve. Finally, Bartholomew is said to have asked Jesus about the greatest sin. Jesus replies that to say anything evil against a faithful worshiper of God is to sin against the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BaruchApocalypseof\">Baruch, Apocalypse of<\/p>\n<p>Two different pseudepigraphal works.<\/p>\n<p>1. Pseudepigraphal Jewish document of 87 chapters, written in Hebrew and translated into Greek and from Greek into Syriac. Only a few lines of the Hebrew original still exist, quoted in rabbinic writings. The Syriac manuscript dates from the sixth or seventh century AD and is the only complete text. It shows evidence of multiple authorship and dependence on the book of 2 Esdras in the Apocrypha. Similarity of many expressions to those in the NT suggests that the original may have been composed in the last half of the first century or the first half of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>The text is in seven sections of unequal length containing both prose and poetic material. The subjects dealt with are the Messiah and his future kingdom, Israel’s past woes, and the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians. Theological questions such as sin and suffering, free will, the number of people to be saved by the Messiah, and the resurrection of the righteous are not always treated consistently within the text. Some passages paint an optimistic picture of Israel’s future; others are deeply pessimistic. In general the world is a scene of corruption for which no remedy exists. A new and spiritual world is at hand: “Whatever is now is nothing, but that which shall be is very great. For everything that is corruptible shall pass away, and everything that dies shall depart and all the present time, which is defiled with evils.” The alternating optimism and pessimism may reflect the changing fortunes of Judaism in the first and second centuries <span>AD<\/span> or simply the outlook of the different authors. The message of hope is directed to those who keep the law of Moses: “For the righteous justly hope for the end, and without fear depart from this habitation, because they have with Thee a store of works preserved in treasuries.”<\/p>\n<p>The final section of the book is identified as “the epistle which Baruch, the son of Neriah, sent to the nine and a half tribes.” It was sent by being “bound to the neck of the eagle,” probably meaning that it was intended for the Jews scattered outside Palestine (the Diaspora).<\/p>\n<p>Baruch was the prophet Jeremiah’s companion and secretary (Jer 36:4-8). His name was attached to a number of apocryphal and pseudepigraphal writings composed long after his death. The Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch is also called 2 Baruch to distinguish it clearly from the book of Baruch (1 Baruch) in the Apocrypha.<\/p>\n<li>2. Pseudepigraphal document of 17 chapters, also called the Greek Apocalypse of Baruch or 3 Baruch. It is preserved in Greek, Ethiopic, Armenian, and Slavonic manuscripts. It was first published in Venice in 1609 and then in 1868, although its existence was suggested by the early Christian theologian Origen. Like 2 Baruch, this apocalypse seems to be a composite document of the second century <span>AD<\/span> but in contrast is a Christian document intended to warn unconverted Jews and to encourage Christians to be patient in dealing with them.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BasilidesGospelof\">Basilides, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>Polemic commentary on the Gospels by a second-century Gnostic. Basilides’s writings remain only as allusions and fragments in later works by several church fathers. Basilides taught in Alexandria during the reign of the Roman emperor Hadrian (<span>AD<\/span> 117–138). His teacher, Glaucias, claimed to be a firsthand interpreter of the apostle Peter. Basilides asserted that his Gnostic scheme emerged from Peter’s views on the relationship between God and Christ. He described God paradoxically as a nonexistent Being who “generated” three Sonships. Through successive ascents and enlightenments, the gospel of the supreme God (the Gospel of Light) eventually descended upon Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Origen stated that “Basilides dared to write a gospel According to Basilides.” Clement of Alexandria and the writer of a fourth-century fragment, Acta Archelai, thought that Origen referred to an apocryphal gospel, the teaching of which was deduced from Irenaeus’s account. Today, more in line with Hippolytus’s understanding of Basilides, this work is regarded as merely a commentary on the Gospels. Basilides was probably not responsible for the magical rites and libertinism of the Basilidians, a Gnostic sect led by his son Isidore and continuing in Egypt to the end of the century.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BenjaminTestamentof\">Benjamin, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BirthofMary\">Birth of Mary<\/p>\n<p>An early Gnostic writing. “The Gnostics have a book which they call the Birth (or Descent) of Mary, in which are horrible and deadly things.” So said the fourth-century bishop Ephiphanius in describing the Birth of Mary, a work that has not survived. The Birth of Mary claimed to reveal what Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, saw in the temple—namely, the Jewish god in the form of an ass. That Jews and Christians worshiped an ass-god was commonly held by their critics in those days. This blasphemous work should not be confused with the Gospel of the Birth of Mary, a fanciful but relatively harmless account of Mary’s birth, early life, and marriage to Joseph.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BirthofMaryGospelofthe\">Birth of Mary, Gospel of the<\/p>\n<p>Collection of legends purporting to tell Mary’s story from birth to King Herod’s slaughter of the children in Bethlehem. The earliest such manuscript is called Book of the Nativity of Mary or Gospel of James because it claimed to be written by James, half brother of Jesus. It was written by <span>AD<\/span> 150, since Justin, an early Christian writer, named it in his <em>Dialogues<\/em> (165). It was rediscovered for the West by Postel, who translated it from Greek into Latin (<em>Protevangelium Jacobi,<\/em> 1552). Before it was lost, two major Latin revisions of it had been produced: Pseudo-Matthew and the Gospel of the Nativity of Mary, compiled around the sixth and ninth centuries respectively. These revisions amplified the Book of the Nativity of Mary with more fanciful legends and were the basis for the Golden Legends of James of Voragine (1230–1298), which in turn became instrumental in fostering veneration of Mary.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Book of the Nativity of Mary, Mary is born to rich, barren parents (Joachim and Anna) through angelic response to their prayers. They dedicate Mary to the Lord. At six months Mary walks seven steps, so Anna makes her bedroom a sanctuary, allowing nothing unclean to enter, and vows that Mary will walk again only in the temple. At age three Mary is placed in the temple and receives food from an angel. On Mary’s twelfth birthday the high priest asks God what to do and is told to marry her to a widower. Elderly Joseph is chosen when a dove springs from his rod. Months later, Mary “gives birth” to Jesus in Bethlehem’s cave, through a light so bright that none can see; the light gradually withdraws and the Child appears at Mary’s breast. The Book of the Nativity of Mary closes with the magi and Herod’s slaughter of infants. Mary saves Jesus by wrapping him in swaddling clothes and laying him in a manger.<\/p>\n<p>Recently another Greek fragment, this one from the Gospel of Mary, was found (see photo). The fragment is too little to tell us much about the content of this gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BookoftheCock\">Book of the Cock<\/p>\n<p>Apocryphal story preserved by the church of Ethiopia and still read there on the Thursday before Easter. According to the Book of the Cock, on the night of the Last Supper, Akrosina, wife of Simon the Pharisee, presents Jesus with a nicely prepared cock for dinner. After Judas leaves the room, Jesus touches the cock and it comes to life. He instructs it to follow Judas and to report his dealings. The cock returns and tells about the forthcoming betrayal, mentioning Paul of Tarsus as one of those involved. The disciples weep. Jesus sends the cock to the sky for a thousand years.<\/p>\n<p>A similar story exists as a fragment in Sahidic Coptic. In the Coptic version the resurrection of the cock is a symbol of the resurrection of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"CopticLivesoftheVirgin\">Coptic Lives of the Virgin<\/p>\n<p>Apocryphal works concerning Mary, the mother of Jesus, in the Egyptian language of Coptic. <em>See<\/em> Virgin, Life of the (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"CorinthiansThird\">Corinthians, Third<\/p>\n<p>Apocryphal correspondence purporting to be between the apostle Paul and the Corinthian church. Written during the second century and known as 3 Corinthians, the work consists of three parts: an epistle allegedly from Stephanus of Corinth to Paul concerning two false apostles, Simon and Cleobius; a brief narrative telling of its delivery; and Paul’s reply and refutation of the false doctrine. The sequence of letters was originally part of the Acts of Paul, a longer apocryphal document, but circulated on its own as well—it even found its way into the text of the Armenian Bible. It pretends to explain the reference in 2 Corinthians 2:4 to a letter written in great distress.<\/p>\n<p>According to an early church father, Tertullian <em>(On Baptism),<\/em> the author of 3 Corinthians was a presbyter (church leader) of Asia who forged it out of love for Paul shortly after <span>AD<\/span> 160. That presbyter’s removal from office indicates the stern attitude of the early Christians toward the writing of documents falsely claiming apostolic origin.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"DanTestamentof\">Dan, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"DialogueoftheRedeemer\">Dialogue of the Redeemer<\/p>\n<p>Christian Gnostic document, also called the Dialogue of the Savior. The document was found in the ancient Nag Hammadi Library at the modern city of Nag Hammadi (Upper Egypt) in 1946. The Dialogue is a fictitious account of a conversation between Jesus and some of his disciples in which they discuss questions about the universe, humanity, the end times, and salvation. The manuscript is in poor condition. Its authorship and origin are unknown, though it was possibly written in Egypt during the second or third centuries <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"DiscourseofTheodosius\">Discourse of Theodosius<\/p>\n<p>Coptic Boharic version of the Assumption of the Virgin and a main source for the Coptic form of that legend. <em>See<\/em> Virgin, Assumption of the (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"DoctrinaAddaei\">Doctrina Addaei<\/p>\n<p>Expanded Syriac form of the Epistles of Christ and Abgarus, written about <span>AD<\/span> 400. The Doctrina Addaei tells a story about the contacts between Abgar (Abgarus), king of Edessa, and Jesus Christ. King Abgar, suffering from an unspecified ailment, is said to have sent a messenger to Jesus bearing the king’s written request for healing along with an offer of sanctuary for Jesus in his kingdom. Jesus responds orally, promising to send one of his followers to Abgar after his own ascension to heaven. Abgar’s envoy also takes back a self-portrait of Jesus that becomes the pride of Edessa. Later Addai visits the kingdom, heals Abgar, and establishes Christianity there. <em>See<\/em> Abgarus, Letters of Christ and (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"EbionitesGospelofthe\">Ebionites, Gospel of the<\/p>\n<p>Gospel quoted by one early Christian writer, Epiphanius (fourth century), in a work against heresies. The Gospel of the Ebionites is possibly the same as the apocryphal Gospel of the Hebrews, although some scholars associate it with the Gospel of the Nazarenes. The Ebionites were vegetarians; Epiphanius’s citations stress the vegetarian diets of John the Baptist and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"EgyptiansGospelofthe\">Egyptians, Gospel of the<\/p>\n<p>Two apocryphal works with the same name.<\/p>\n<p>1. Apocryphal second-century <span>AD<\/span> Greek writing, mentioned by the early church writers, Clement and Origen. Used in Egypt, the composition seems to have contained and propagated Gnostic teachings, especially those advocated in Syria by Simon and Menander. According to these Gnostics, marriage, eating meat, and procreation were evil. Clement may have quoted from this writing to refute the beliefs of the Encratites, who broadly agreed with the Syrian Gnostics on those matters. The Gnostics’ depreciation of women was reflected in the quotations Clement used.<\/p>\n<li>2. Composition discovered in 1946 at Chenoboskion (Egypt) in the Nag Hammadi collection of Gnostic writing. The principal title of the work, described in the colophon as “Gospel of the Egyptians” was “Sacred Book of the Great Invisible Spirit.” This work dealt with emanations from “the primal spirit of the cosmos” and perhaps was a product of the Barbelo Gnostic sect.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"EldadandMedadBookof\">Eldad and Medad, Book of<\/p>\n<p>Pre-Christian pseudepigraphic composition containing the alleged prophecies of Eldad and Medad, two persons appointed as elders by Moses (Nm 11:26). Since the nature of their prophecy was not specified, it gave rise to a lost work that is quoted in the Shepherd of Hermas as follows: “The Lord is near to them who return to Him, as it is written in Eldad and Medad who prophesied to the people in the wilderness” (Vision II, ch 3). That is the only source of information concerning the lost book.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"EugnostosLetterof\">Eugnostos, Letter of<\/p>\n<p>Gnostic work. Found near the modern city of Nag Hammadi, the Letter of Eugnostos was written in Coptic by a teacher to his disciple. Both author and date of composition are unknown. An early example of non-Christian Gnostic writing, it perhaps served as the basis for a Christian Gnostic composition, “The Wisdom of Jesus Christ.”<\/p>\n<p>The Letter of Eugnostos attempts to prove the existence of an invisible spiritual realm. It also stresses God’s remoteness from humanity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"EveGospelof\">Eve, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>Gnostic and apocalyptic writings, known solely through a citation by Epiphanius, a late fourth-century metropolitan of Cyprus. Epiphanius quoted the Gospel of Eve in a biting refutation of Gnostic and Origenistic teachings. Evidently a cult had formed around Eve as if her name implied revelation because the serpent had spoken to her in the Garden of Eden. Epiphanius’s quotation from the Gospel of Eve roughly translates: “I stood on a high mountain and saw a giant and a feeble man, and I heard a voice like thunder. ‘Come near me and listen,’ and he spoke to me saying, ‘I am you and you are me. Wherever you are, there I am. I am spread through all things, and any place you are able to retire into or take shelter in me; and, taking shelter in me, you take shelter in yourself.’ ”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"EzekielApocryphal\">Ezekiel, Apocryphal<\/p>\n<p>Noncanonical book of Ezekiel mentioned by Josephus, first-century Jewish historian. An apocryphal Ezekiel is cited in five early Christian writings and a recent archaeological discovery. Bishop Epiphanius (fourth century) cited an Ezekiel parable, in proof of the resurrection of the interdependent soul and body, about a blind man and a lame man collaborating to rob an orchard. Clement of Rome, writing to the Corinthians (AD 90?), and Clement of Alexandria in two of his writings (<span>AD<\/span> 200?) have noncanonical Ezekiel quotations. An Ezekiel apocryphon is mentioned in the pseudo-Athanasian canon (purporting to list canonical books of the Bible) and is named in the stichometry (prose written in rhythmic phrases) of Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople (<span>AD<\/span> 806–815). In 1940 Campbell Bonner published Greek papyrus fragments that confirm the existence of an apocryphal Ezekiel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"EzraFourthBookof\">Ezra, Fourth Book of<\/p>\n<p>Alternate name for the apocryphal book 2 Esdras. <em>See<\/em> Esdras, Second Book of.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"GadTestamentof\">Gad, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"GenesisApocryphon\">Genesis Apocryphon<\/p>\n<p>Name given to one of the seven large Dead Sea Scrolls recovered from the first Qumran cave in 1947. With three others it came into the possession of the Syrian archbishop of Jerusalem but could not be unrolled and photographed because it was badly preserved, having not been kept in an earthen jar like the others. Some small pieces were detached, however, and certain words on them indicated that it might be an apocryphal Aramaic work connected with the patriarch Enoch. Further scraps spoke of Lamech, however, thus the scroll was tentatively named for that ancient person.<\/p>\n<p>Eventually it was unrolled and found to be not only damaged but incomplete; the beginning and the end were missing. The inner portion had been best preserved, but considerable damage had been done to the text by the ink it had been written with. The scroll not only dealt with Enoch and Lamech but with other persons mentioned in the book of Genesis. It proved to be an Aramaic form of parts of Genesis dealing with the patriarchs, but it included legends and other materials presented in memoir style, not found in the Hebrew Bible. That style was popular among pious Jews at the beginning of the Christian era, thus its original has been dated to the first century <span>BC<\/span>. The Qumran copy was probably made between 50 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The literary characteristics of the scroll have presented some classification problems. Free expansion and inclusion of nonbiblical material led certain scholars to call the scroll a “targum” or commentary-expansion of the Genesis text. Others have regarded it as a “midrash” or sermonic account of the Hebrew narrative. The scroll contains both elements and is best regarded as an independent recounting of certain Genesis stories, enriched by the inclusion of imaginative material such as a description of the beauty of the patriarch Abraham’s wife Sarah; dreams; and accounts of plagues and journeys.<\/p>\n<p>The Aramaic Apocryphon somewhat antedates the one used in Palestine in the time of Christ. It contains some Hebraisms but is mostly written in good Aramaic, much of which parallels biblical Aramaic. The language of the scroll, however, is later than the period of old Aramaic (tenth to eighth centuries <span>BC<\/span>) or official Aramaic (Assyrian and Persian periods), as the presence of certain grammatical forms indicate. Most scholars have described the language as middle Aramaic and have placed it between the Aramaic of Daniel and later western Aramaic. Those scholars generally assign a second-century <span>BC<\/span> date to Daniel, but that conclusion needs to be modified because the Qumran material shows that no canonical work was composed later than about 350 <span>BC<\/span>. On any evidence, the Aramaic of Daniel is earlier than that of the Apocryphon and seems to fit properly into the period when official Aramaic was the dominant form of the language. The Genesis Apocryphon presents no valid reasons for dating the Aramaic of Daniel or Ezra later than the sixth to fifth centuries <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"GospelofThomas\">Gospel of Thomas<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Thomas, Gospel of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"IsaiahAscensionof\">Isaiah, Ascension of<\/p>\n<p>Pseudepigraphal apocalyptic work widely known to the early Christians; also known as the Martyrdom of Isaiah, the Testament of Hezekiah, and the Vision of Isaiah. It was rediscovered when an Ethiopic version of part of the text was published in 1819. The full Ethiopic version is the only complete version in existence. A partial Latin text published in 1832 had actually been published in Venice over three centuries before. Slavonic and Coptic versions also exist. All may be traced back to two Greek versions of the third, fifth, and sixth centuries.<\/p>\n<p>It is not clear whether the original was a single composition or even whether the authorship was Christian or Jewish with later Christian editing. The final form may date from the latter part of the second century. It was known to Ambrose, Jerome, Origen, Tertullian, and possibly to Justyn Martyr. The contents fall under three heads:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Martyrdom of Isaiah. This material consists of prophetic utterances, including the prophet’s prediction of his own death at the hands of King Manasseh of Judah. The document deals with the dark apostasy of the king, who, indwelt by Satan and following Beliar, leads his people into all manner of sin. Jerusalem, whose fall is prophesied, is called “Sodom” and its princes “Gomorrah.” In the form of a midrash (devotional sermon), this section dwells on Isaiah’s firm rejection of compromise or recantation. Isaiah’s martyrdom by being “sawn in two” is the portion with which the church fathers seem to have been familiar.<\/p>\n<li>2. The Testament of Hezekiah. This section is apocalyptic, a vision Isaiah passes on to his king. It speaks of the descent of “the Beloved,” a title used in this document for the Messiah. The vision covers the Messiah’s incarnation, life, death, resurrection, and ascension, then turns to the early history of the church and the apostasy that precedes the second coming of the Lord. The Antichrist is revealed as Beliar or Satan, who assumes human form and kills his mother (no doubt directed at the Roman emperor Nero, who murdered his mother, Agrippina). The whole section is based on Daniel and the biblical Apocalypse and was also influenced by Gnosticism. The conclusion of the vision (the Beloved’s victory, the two resurrections, and the final judgment) very closely parallels the consummation of all things in the NT book of Revelation.<\/li>\n<li>3. The Vision of Isaiah. This section resembles #2 even linguistically but shows more Gnostic influence: Isaiah is lifted to the dwelling place of the Trinity, the seventh heaven, and shown many mysteries of Christ. Because of this vision Manasseh kills the prophet. Gnostic doctrine, as propagated by Cerinthus at the end of the first century, is evident. Jesus, earthly born, becomes the host of the Christ, who leaves his earthly tenement at the Crucifixion.<\/li>\n<p>Historically, the value of the Ascension of Isaiah is to show the welter of conflicting opinion which, claiming authority and inspiration, besieged the minds of the early Christians.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"IsaiahMartyrdomof\">Isaiah, Martyrdom of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Isaiah, Ascension of (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"IssacharTestamentof\">Issachar, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JamesApocalypseof\">James, Apocalypse of<\/p>\n<p>There were two Gnostic apocalypses of James (designated “first” and “second”). The first, covering over 20 pages of text, purports to be a revelation given by the Lord, some of it before the Crucifixion and some after it, to James, his brother, who was also know as James the righteous. The two documents referred to as the Apocalypse of James are in Codex V of the Nag Hammadi literature discovered in 1945 in Egypt just west of the Nile River opposite the city of Chenoboskion and are distinct from the Apocryphon of James, which is included in NT apocryphal writings. The second apocalypse composed of 20 pages of Coptic text is purportedly a speech delivered by James the Just on the fifth step of the temple and contains many references to or echoes of canonical Scriptures. The work ends with the multitude casting James down from the temple and stoning him in a manner reminiscent of the martyrdom of Stephen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JamesAscentsof\">James, Ascents of<\/p>\n<p>Lost book mentioned only by Epiphanius (bishop of the Greek island of Salamis) in his fourth-century work <em>Refutation of All the Heresies.<\/em> According to Epiphanius, the Ascents of James was used by the Ebionites, a rigidly ascetic sect of Jewish Christians. The book represented James, Jesus’ brother, as having spoken against the temple and sacrifices. It declared the apostle Paul to be a Greek who went to Jerusalem, sought to marry the high priest’s daughter, and to that end became a proselyte and was circumcised. When he did not win the young woman, he inveighed against the Sabbath, the Law, and circumcision.<\/p>\n<p>In a commentary on Galatians (1865), J. B. Lightfoot suggested that the book’s title referred to James’s ascents up the temple steps, from which he addressed the people. Lightfoot also suggested that James’s death was the grand climax of the ascents. According to a quote from the early Christian writer Hegesippus (as recorded in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em>), James was cast down to his death from the pinnacle of the temple.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JamesProtevangeliumof\">James, Protevangelium of<\/p>\n<p>This is an apocryphal “gospel” that tells of the token marriage and pregnancy of Mary and of Jesus’ birth, childhood, and adolescent years. This apocryphal writing was discovered in the 16th century by Guillaume Postel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JobTestamentof\">Job, Testament of<\/p>\n<p>Apocalyptic literature bearing resemblance to the biblical book of Job. The book was probably written in Greek in the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Since it is devoid of Christian thought, it was likely written by a Jew.<\/p>\n<p>In chapters 1–45, Job is the speaker. He comes to understand that a nearby temple has been desecrated by there having been offered in it sacrifices to Satan. When Job destroys it, Satan threatens him. Job’s friends come to console him but their speeches are greatly abbreviated. Elihu is represented as Satan’s mouthpiece and earns God’s displeasure. But Job sacrifices for all three friends. He remarries and has seven sons and three daughters, who inherit his wealth. Chapters 46–51, in which Job’s brother is the speaker, conclude the narrative.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JohntheBaptistLifeof\">John the Baptist, Life of<\/p>\n<p>A legendary account supposedly written by Serapion dealing with the early life of John the Baptist and especially with the death of his mother, Elizabeth. While Jesus was living with his parents in Egypt, Elizabeth dies on the same day as Herod the Great dies. John, who is but a small boy, does not know how to bury her. The clouds bring Jesus, Mary, and Salome who wash the body. The grave is dug by Michael and Gabriel, who also bring the souls of Zacharias and Simeon. John is then left to grow up in the desert under the care of the angels, while the clouds lift Jesus and Mary to Nazareth where they live.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JohntheEvangelistBookof\">John the Evangelist, Book of<\/p>\n<p>This writing was used most extensively by the Albigenses and was commonly regarded as stemming from the Bogomiles before them. It was written in the form of questions and answers propounded to have come from the apostle John while he leaned upon the breast of Jesus at the Last Supper. This pattern of questions and answers is found in other early Gnostic writings, especially the Gospel of Bartholomew.<\/p>\n<p>The writing contains Gnostic theology. It portrays a world created by Satan and not by God. Christ was not born of Mary but was an angel sent forth to the earth. He “entered in by the ear and came forth by the ear” of Mary. John the Baptist was sent by Satan, and his disciples (the Roman Catholic Church) are not the disciples of Christ. Baptism and apparently the Lord’s Supper are valueless.<\/p>\n<p>The writing is preserved only in Latin and in its present form is not earlier than the 12th century. A convenient English translation may be found in M. R. James, <em>The Apocryphal NT<\/em> (1924).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JosephPrayerof\">Joseph, Prayer of<\/p>\n<p>Jewish apocalyptic work. The Prayer of Joseph won the commendation of Origen, an early church scholar, as a document “not to be despised.” Origen’s quotations provide almost the only surviving information about the work, so that its total content and significance are unclear. An ancient list of OT apocryphal and canonical writings puts the Prayer of Joseph third and mentions its length as 1,100 verses. Origen’s quotations concern mainly Joseph’s father, Jacob. Jacob exists in the form of an angel, bearing Jacob’s given name Israel. He is the speaker in the quoted fragments and foretells the fate of humankind. He describes how he met Uriel on a journey to Mesopotamia and how Uriel wrestled with him, claiming to be the greatest of the angels. The apocalyptic poet had in mind the story of Jacob’s mysterious wrestling at Jabbok (Gn 32:22-29) and passages such as Daniel 10:13. Because Jacob claims to be “the first born of all living beings” and therefore the chief of all angels, Uriel challenges him.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JosephTestamentof\">Joseph, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JosephtheCarpenterHistoryof\">Joseph the Carpenter, History of<\/p>\n<p>Document glorifying Jesus’ earthly father and promoting a cult of Joseph. Words in chapter 18 of the History of Joseph support a fourth-century date for it. There Jesus tells his mother, “You, too, must look for the same end of life as other mortals.” By the fifth century the doctrine of the “Assumption of the Virgin” was widely held.<\/p>\n<p>The document, derived from the Protevangelium of James, was contaminated by both Gnosticism and other religious beliefs of Egypt, the country in which it was written. It is extant in Coptic and Arabic and also in a fourth-century translation of the Coptic text.<\/p>\n<p>The History of Joseph the Carpenter claims to give an account of Joseph’s life and his model death at the age of 111. The story is allegedly told by Jesus to his disciples on the Mt of Olives. Joseph, a carpenter (Mt 13:55), is a widower well advanced in years when he marries Mary, who is only 12. (He had six children by an earlier marriage.) Joseph is buried according to the rites of the Egyptian Osiris cult after Jesus pronounces a eulogy.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JubileesBookof\">Jubilees, Book of<\/p>\n<p>Jubilees is a pseudepigraphal work from the last half of the second century <span>BC<\/span> during the Maccabean period. It is an invaluable source for understanding the environment in the age prior to the launching of the Christian church. Jubilees stands with the Book of Enoch and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs as the most important Hebrew or Aramaic literature of the time. Like these it was translated into Greek and used by the church fathers. Most probably, Jubilees was written in Hebrew since it purported a Mosaic authorship and since its nationalistic Maccabean environment would demand it. Fragments of 10 manuscripts in Hebrew found at Qumran support the thesis that it was originally in that language.<\/p>\n<p>The work is referred to by later Greek writers following Hebrew sources as “Jubilees” and “the little (lesser) Genesis.” It is also entitled “The Apocalypse of Moses” and the “Testament of Moses.” In revised forms it has been called “The Book of Adam’s Daughters” and “The Life of Adam.”<\/p>\n<p>Complete, fifty-chapter manuscripts exist in six Ethiopian texts of which the texts of the fifth and sixth centuries are best. The Latin text is valuable but partial and only a few fragments of the Greek version remain. The Hebrew fragments found at Qumran are of special importance since they are from the period of original writing. The Bibliotheque Nationale has “Ethiopien 51” and “Ethiopien 160.” The British Museum has <em>Kufale,<\/em> or <em>Liber Jubilaeorum,<\/em> and <em>Enoch<\/em><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The author of Jubilees claims a direct revelational source for the teaching that he espouses. God had spoken to Moses in the Pentateuch in the “lesser law” in this “little book of Genesis.” At Sinai God communicated to Moses by the “Angel of the Presence” saying to the angel, “Write for Moses from the beginning of creation until my sanctuary has been built among them for all eternity” (1:27). This is supplementary to the “first law” (6:22).<\/p>\n<p>Following a brief introduction Jubilees follows the text of Genesis and Exodus to 14:31. This midrashic treatment of the Pentateuchal material attempts to show that the patriarchy adhered to the law even prior to Moses. The author’s aim is to strengthen classical Judaism in the face of the serious intrusions of Hellenistic culture among Jewish peoples. In doing this the author does not hesitate in adding and subtracting from Pentateuchal history. The patriarchs are adorned in every way. Anything that showed their weaknesses and sins was removed and legendary content inserted to glorify these fathers. The patriarchs are the fountainheads of culture. Enoch invented writing; Noah, medicine; Abraham, plowing.<\/p>\n<p>Appealing to Leviticus 25:8-12, the work emphasizes the importance of the number seven. History from Adam to Moses is arranged according to cycles of seven. This manner of compartmentalizing history into jubilee periods was revealed to Moses at Sinai and so has divine sanction and in fact is mandated. The philosophy of history that springs from this sees God acting sovereignly and uniquely in Israel in distinction to his relationship with the gentile world. The other nations are ruled by angels but not Israel, which is directly in God’s charge (Jubilees 15:31ff.).<\/p>\n<p>The polemic that Jubilees mounts against the lunar calendar (6:36-38) and its acceptance of the solar calendar is but another facet of the drive for a deep reform that will cleanse Israel. Israel is to be separated to God in every way with no intermingling in marriage or sitting at the table with Gentiles. There is a surprising stringency demanded in Sabbath keeping (50:1-13). The penalty of death is levied against those who travel, buy or sell, draw water, bear burdens, snare creatures, or have marital relations on the Sabbath. These go far beyond the biblical requirements and belong to that milieu that produced the Qumran community and the Essenes.<\/p>\n<p>The apocalyptic declaration of the Angel of Presence contains a clear but limited eschatological truth. Jubilees does contain the expectation of an immediate establishment of the messianic age. The entire emphasis, however, is such that ethical and cultural purposes are preeminent.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JudahTestamentof\">Judah, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JudasIscariotGospelof\">Judas Iscariot, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>Very old Gnostic writing probably produced by the Cainite sect. As it is not preserved for us today, we know it only through quotations in the writings of early Christians, especially Irenaeus. Thus, it must have been written before the middle of the second century <span>AD<\/span>. It probably contained a body of secret doctrine purportedly revealed by Judas Iscariot, summarizing the truth of superior and perfect knowledge supposedly revealed to this sect of the Gnostics. The gospel sets forth the “mystery of the betrayal,” explaining how Judas through his treachery made the salvation of all mankind possible. This was accomplished by his forestalling the destruction of the truth proclaimed by Christ or by his thwarting the designs of the evil powers, the Archons, who wished to prevent the crucifixion of Christ because they knew it would destroy their evil power.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"LentulusEpistleof\">Lentulus, Epistle of<\/p>\n<p>Lentulus, ostensibly a predecessor of Pontius Pilate, is said to have prepared a report to the Roman Senate known as the Letter (or Epistle) of Lentulus. In it he included a detailed description of Jesus: “tall and handsome, his countenance inspiring reverence along with love and fear, his hair dark, shining, curling, parted in the middle, his face with a delicate rudiness. . . .” The authenticity of the letter is extremely doubtful.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"LeviTestamentof\">Levi, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"LivesofAdamandEve\">Lives of Adam and Eve<\/p>\n<p>A general title given to a noncanonical writing extant in Greek and Latin. The book is Jewish in nature, though there is a Christian flavor that causes most scholars to date the original work to the beginning of the Christian era. The content of the book is an expansion on the biblical story of Adam and Eve.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek version begins with the expulsion from Eden. In a dream, Eve sees the murder of Abel. After Adam had fallen ill Seth and Eve went to obtain oil from the tree of life. Michael the archangel met Seth and told him that Adam would die. Upon his death, he was ultimately taken to the third heaven. Seth witnessed how the angels interred his father and received instructions on how to bury his mother, who died a week after Adam.<\/p>\n<p>The Latin version gives additional information. After the expulsion from the Garden, Eve asked Adam to kill her but instead of that he suggested they both do an act of penitence. Adam went to stand in the Jordan for 40 days and Eve went to stand in the water of the Euphrates for 37 days. While there, she was again tempted by Satan, who was disguised as an angel of light but was eventually exposed by Adam. Satan now explained the reason for his hostility toward them: when the angels were commanded to worship the Lord, he refused to do obeisance to God and was consequently cast out of heaven.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"MatthewMartyrdomof\">Matthew, Martyrdom of<\/p>\n<p>Loosely organized tale of Matthew’s martyrdom that borrows heavily from the “Acts of Andrew and Matthias” and assumes that Matthias was in fact Matthew. The document represents the low literary and theological impulse of the later apocryphal texts.<\/p>\n<p>The story begins when Matthew is commissioned by Jesus to plant a staff in Myrna, the city of man-eaters. Matthew does so, after exorcising the demon Asmodeus from the king’s wife and family. The staff becomes a tree overnight, Matthew preaches to the people, and they “become humanized.” But Asmodeus seeks revenge by directing the king to burn Matthew. The fire consumes golden idols and many soldiers, then turns into a dragon and chases the king, who begs Matthew for help. But Matthew dies.<\/p>\n<p>A somewhat repentant but not yet converted king places the body of Matthew in an iron casket and sinks it secretly in the sea. The next day Matthew appears on the sea in the presence of two shining men and a “beautiful” child. The king is finally converted, baptized, and accepted into the church. Matthew appears to confer on the king his own name and to ordain him a priest and his family, deacons and deaconesses. Then Matthew ascends to heaven with two angels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"MedadBookofEldadand\">Medad, Book of Eldad and<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Eldad and Medad, Book of (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"MosesAssumptionof\">Moses, Assumption of<\/p>\n<p>A Jewish legend that Moses was taken bodily into heaven without dying. Probably written between <span>AD<\/span> 7 and 30, it may be a combination of two earlier works, and appears to borrow heavily from the book of Deuteronomy. The work was likely produced to provide a miraculous ending to Moses’ outstanding earthly life, attributing to him an experience similar to Elijah’s. But this Jewish legend is contrary to the OT account of Moses’ death (Dt 32:48-50; 34:5-7).<\/p>\n<h6>The Lost Assumption of Moses<\/h6>\n<p>Three facts indicate that there once was an apocryphal book that contained the legend of the assumption of Moses: (1) early lists of apocryphal works mention a work by this title; (2) several church fathers refer to it; and (3) a few fragments in Greek have survived.<\/p>\n<p>The following items appeared in the work. God commissioned the archangel Michael to bury Moses’ body. Satan opposed Moses’ burial because he claimed authority over all matter and because Moses was a murderer. Michael countered Satan’s claims and charged him with tempting Eve in Eden. Joshua and Caleb then watched Moses’ assumption occur in a strange way. As they watched, they saw Moses’ dead body buried in the mountain, but they also saw Moses himself in the company of the angels. In effect Moses’ body died, but Moses himself did not.<\/p>\n<p>Though often stated that Jude (v 9) was quoted from the Assumption of Moses, this is impossible to prove, simply because the relevant portions of that work have not survived. The most one can say is that several church fathers, including Clement of Alexandria (d. <span>AD<\/span> 215) and Origen (c. 185–254), suggested that the Assumption of Moses was the source for the account in Jude 1:9. They had both works. We have only Jude, so we cannot check their conclusions. The matter is further complicated because there is another work (see next section) now called the Assumption of Moses. People often suppose that Jude 1:9 is a citation from that book. It is not.<\/p>\n<h6>The Extant Assumption of Moses<\/h6>\n<p>This work, perhaps written during Jesus’ lifetime, purports to be a description of Moses’ predictions to Joshua of the destiny of the nation of Israel. It is similar to other apocryphal, nonhistorical writings that were written under the names of great Jewish leaders.<\/p>\n<p>It was discovered quite by chance in 1861, in the Ambrosian Library in Milan, Italy. The manuscript, dated to the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>, is a very poor copy of a Latin translation, perhaps derived from a Greek translation of a Hebrew original. The beginning and the ending are lost. There are numerous spelling mistakes, and there is no space between words. Not surprisingly, scholars have long disputed the reading, interpretation, and translation even of whole verses.<\/p>\n<p>The opening three lines have not survived, so the original title has been lost. When discovered, the work was assumed to be the long-lost Assumption of Moses, but this identification is now widely doubted. Even though the book is still called by this title, it is far more likely to be either the Testament of Moses (which is also mentioned, along with the Assumption of Moses, in early lists of apocryphal works) or a composite work resulting from the combination of the Testament and the Assumption into one work.<\/p>\n<p>There is only one reference to Moses’ assumption in the book, and it comes in connection with a mention of his death (10:12). Because the ending of the book is also lost, it is impossible to know the contents of the conclusion or to tell whether this one remaining reference to Moses’ assumption is original or whether it has been added by a scribe by mistake or by an editor combining two different works. It is clear, however, that the author of the surviving section believed that Moses expected to die (1:15; 10:12-14) and that Joshua assumed that he would (11:4-8).<\/p>\n<p>The work begins midsentence (three lines are missing) and dates Moses’ following speech to 2,500 years after Creation (1:2-5). Expecting to die, Moses summons Joshua, encourages him, and tells him that God created the world for his people (the Israelites), who will repent before the consummation at the end of the days (1:6-18).<\/p>\n<p>Then Moses foretells Israel’s future. The people will inherit the land (Canaan) and be ruled by local magistrates, chiefs (judges?), and kings (2:1-3). The kingdom will divide, and the people will turn to idolatry (2:4-9). A king from the east (Nebuchadnezzar) will take two tribes into captivity for about 77 years, where they will recall Moses’ warnings (3:1-14; cf. Jer 25:11-12; Dt 28:15-68; 30:15-20). Someone (Daniel) will pray for deliverance (cf. Dn 9:4-19), and God will persuade a king (Cyrus) to send the exiles home (4:1-6; cf. Is 45:1-6; Ezr 1:1-4). Some exiles will return to their appointed place (Jerusalem) and rewall it but be unable to offer [proper] sacrifices (4:7-8; contrast Ezr 3:1-7). Others will remain in exile but will increase in population (4:9). This concludes the OT period and begins the intertestamental period (c. 400 to 1 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The widespread apostasy of the Seleucid period (c. 201–267 <span>BC<\/span>) is described, with special reference to priests and judges (4:1-6). The Maccabees, who gained and maintained political independence from Syria (in 164 <span>BC<\/span>) are not mentioned. Instead, the focus is on the kings (the Hasmoneans) who made themselves high priests (6:1). Next will come an insolent king (Herod the Great, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>), who will rule ruthlessly (6:2-7). Then a powerful king of the West will conquer the people, take some captive, crucify others, and burn part of the temple (6:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>From this point on, the author, having reached his own period, had to guess at the future, so the predictions that he put in Moses’ mouth are general or obscure and often unfulfilled. The next rulers (Sadducees?) would be impious, treacherous, gluttons, deceitful, and worried about ritual uncleanness while living in luxury at the expense of the poor (7:1-10). An unprecedented time of wrath would follow, when a great king would persecute the Jews, torturing, imprisoning, and even crucifying them for practicing circumcision (8:1-5). During this persecution, one man, Taxo, a Levite with seven sons, would remain faithful to God and die rather than adopt Greek customs (8:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>The next section (10:1-10), an apocalyptic poem (ten stanzas, each with three lines), is the only apocalyptic section of the book. The Lord’s kingdom will appear, Satan will be no more, and the chief angel (Michael) will avenge Israel (10:1-2). “The Heavenly One will arise from His royal throne,” and there will be miraculous signs on the earth and in the sky; even the ocean will drain away (10:3-6). The Most High, the Eternal God, will appear and punish the Gentiles, destroying their idols (10:7). But Israel will be happy and exalted, rejoicing at seeing her enemies in Gehenna (hell) and thankfully praising her Creator (10:8-10). With Moses’ mention of his death and some consoling words for Joshua, the composition ends in an incomplete form.<\/p>\n<p>The book must have been written after Herod died and Varus had subdued a rebellion in Judea (4 <span>BC<\/span>) and before the temple was destroyed (<span>AD<\/span> 70). The book predicts that Herod’s sons will not rule as long as Herod himself did (34 years, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>). This prediction may be based on the fact that one son, Archelaus, was deposed after a 10-year reign (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 6). If so, the book was written after <span>AD<\/span> 6. But two other sons (Philip and Antipas) actually ruled longer than their father. For the author not to know this requires that the book must have been written within 34 years of Herod’s death—in other words, before <span>AD<\/span> 30. Therefore, the book was probably written sometime between <span>AD<\/span> 6 and 30. This also means that the book reflects Jewish thinking during Jesus’ lifetime.<\/p>\n<p>The author was evidently a Palestinian Jew, but it is doubtful whether he was a member of any known major sect of the times. He hates Roman rule (8:1–10:10) without advocating revolt, as the Zealots and their predecessors did. His interest in the temple (2:8-9; 5:3; 6:9; 8:5) is not typical of an Essene. He condemns the Sadducean lifestyle (7:3-10). And his use of apocalyptic writing (10:1-10) is thought to have been unusual for a Pharisee.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"NaphtaliTestamentof\">Naphtali, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"NicodemusGospelof\">Nicodemus, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>Alternate title for the apocryphal work Acts of Pilate. <em>See<\/em> Pilate, Acts of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"NoahBookof\">Noah, Book of<\/p>\n<p>Allusion to the writing of Noah is made in the book of Jubilees where it is said “Noah wrote down all things in a book as we instructed him concerning every kind of medicine. Thus the evil spirits were precluded from (hurting) the sons of Noah” (10:13; see also 21:10). The book of Noah borrows heavily from the book of Enoch (see chs 6–11, 54–55, 60, 65–69, 106–110). The other sections relate to the Noachic flood and subjects about which Noah could be presumed to have knowledge. Unfortunately no separate manuscript of the book of Noah is known to be extant.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OdesofSolomon\">Odes of Solomon<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Solomon, Psalms of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PatriarchsTestamentsoftheTwelve\">Patriarchs, Testaments of the Twelve<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PaulActsof\">Paul, Acts of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Paul and Thecla, Acts of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PaulActsofAndrewand\">Paul, Acts of Andrew and<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Andrew and Paul, Acts of (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PaulandTheclaActsof\">Paul and Thecla, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of Paul and Thecla is one section of an apocryphal work known as the Acts of Paul. It was apparently written in the latter half of the second century <span>AD<\/span> by a church elder who lived in Asia. According to Tertullian (<em>On Baptism<\/em> 17.19-21), the motive for the writing was “love of Paul,” but the presbyter was removed from office for producing this document. It is not clear whether the reason for his deposition was that he made a false claim to apostolic authorship, or whether it was that the viewpoints expressed in the document were considered heretical.<\/p>\n<p>The story reads like a folktale. Paul arrives in Iconium after fleeing from Antioch. He is met by Onesiphorus, who welcomes Paul into his home. A group of people gather there to hear Paul’s message. Beside the window of a neighboring house, Thecla is seated. She cannot see Paul, but she listens intently to his message. Her mother, Thecleia, exclaims, “My daughter, like a spider, is bound by his words to the window, seized by a new craving and a terrible passion.” Paul is teaching that in order to “see God,” a person must live a life of abstinence from sexual activity.<\/p>\n<p>Thecla is engaged to be married, but she is so impressed with Paul’s teaching that she determines she will break her engagement to Thamyris. Thamyris, in distress, appeals to the governor of the city, who arrests and imprisons Paul. Thecla bribes the jailer with bracelets and a silver mirror and enters Paul’s cell. Again she is transfixed by his teaching. At the trial, Thecla is adamant in her refusal to marry Thamyris. Paul is banned from the city; Thecla is condemned to be burned to death. Miraculously her life is spared, and she is reunited with Paul and travels with him to Antioch.<\/p>\n<p>In Antioch, Thecla rebuffs the advances of a nobleman, Alexander, and for a second time is condemned to death. But the wild beasts who are to devour her in the public arena instead lick her feet and protect her. When she throws herself into a water cistern to effect her baptism, she is again spared death—a lightning flash kills the fish lurking in the water, and they float lifeless to the surface. Queen Tryphaena, who has befriended Thecla, faints with shock as repeated attempts are made to take Thecla’s life. Seeing this, Alexander finally begs the governor to set Thecla free.<\/p>\n<p>Free once more, Thecla seeks Paul. She disguises herself as a man by putting on male attire. Arriving in Myra, she finds Paul and announces to him that she is returning to Iconium. Paul commands her to “teach the word of God.” After teaching for a while in Iconium, Thecla travels on to Seleucia.<\/p>\n<p>The remainder of Thecla’s life is not well documented. Some manuscripts record that Thecla, being afraid of the people of Seleucia, withdrew to a mountain and resided in a cave. There she lived an ascetic life, taught certain women who came to her, and carried out a ministry of healing. Later she departed to Rome, seeking Paul. Paul, however, was already dead. When Thecla herself died, at 90 years of age, she was buried not far from the tomb of her beloved master.<\/p>\n<p>Although this work is considered apocryphal and is excluded from the NT canon, there are some early writers who held it in high regard. The Acts of Paul, of which this document forms a part, is mentioned by Origen and by Hippolytus with respect. Eusebius was of the opinion that the document was spurious, but he distinguished it from inferior heretical works. There are two instances where details of information have found their way from the Acts of Paul into early manuscripts of canonical books (2 Tm 3:11; 4:19). It is probable that the viewpoints indicated in this document reflected popular religious traditions widely held in the second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Tertullian, however, argues that the document is quite out of harmony with Paul’s attitudes as expressed in the canonical material. In particular, he objects to the role assumed by a woman in the Acts of Paul and Thecla. Paul, Tertullian says, would never have permitted a woman to teach and to baptize (<em>On Baptism<\/em> 17.21-23). The Acts of Paul and Thecla does differ from the Pauline stance, but not in the way indicated by Tertullian. The document depicts Paul as a proponent of the encratite viewpoint, teaching that celibacy is necessary for salvation. The canonical Paul taught that salvation is attained through faith alone, and that celibacy is a matter of special calling and certainly not the norm for every Christian (1 Cor 7:1-7). The Acts of Paul and Thecla suggests that a woman must assume male attire and must abstain from marriage if she is to exercise a leadership role. The canonical Paul instructed that a woman in a leadership position should dress as a woman (1 Cor 11:4-6), and he affirmed the ministerial function of married women (Rom 16:3). The Acts of Paul and Thecla emulates a woman whose motivating power was personal devotion to the apostle. The canonical writings suggest that Paul strongly discouraged such a show of personal allegiance to himself (1 Cor 1:12-17). Christ alone was to be the motivating influence in Christian service.<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of Paul and Thecla provides us with a unique description of the physical appearance of Paul: “a man small of stature, with a bald head and crooked legs, in good state of body, with eyebrows meeting and nose somewhat hooked, full of friendliness; for now he appeared like a man, and now he had the face of an angel.” This description is probably not reliable in any historical sense; more likely it pictures a typical Jew of the period. But because there is no other description preserved in early documents, this one has formed the basis for the many portraits of Paul that have come down through the centuries.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PaulApocalypseof\">Paul, Apocalypse of<\/p>\n<p>This document, which originated in the late fourth century <span>AD<\/span>, pretends to be a written account of some of the experiences that the apostle Paul had when he was caught up to the third heaven, or paradise, according to 2 Corinthians 12:2-4. The fact that Paul did not describe what he saw or heard during that revelatory vision excited the imagination of some unknown fourth-century Christian. Since the author describes with relish the tortures in hell experienced by a presbyter, bishop, and deacon (chs 34–36) and elsewhere approves of the devotion and piety of monks and nuns (chs 7–9) and of those who are virgins or chaste (ch 22), it is safe to conclude that he was a monk who disapproved of the insincere and hypocritical religiosity of his contemporaries, both laymen and clergy.<\/p>\n<p>This book, originally written in Greek, survives in relatively complete form in Latin. A partial indication of the great popularity of this piece of religious fiction is the fact that it was translated into Ethiopic, Coptic, and Syriac as well as Latin.<\/p>\n<p>The book is loosely structured in seven sections. The work begins with a short introductory section that attempts to explain why the book was unknown from the first to the fourth century (chs 1–2): during the consulate of (emperor) Theodosius Augustus the Younger and Cynegius (the document can thus be dated to <span>AD<\/span> 388), a respectable but nameless person received a revelation through an angel. The man happened to be living in Tarsus in a house once occupied by St Paul himself. The angel told the man to break up the foundations and publish whatever he found. After being pummeled by the angel for disobedience, he finally broke the foundations only to discover a marble box that he immediately delivered to the emperor. The emperor opened the box and found the original version of the Apocalypse of Paul (which he copies) and a pair of shoes used by Paul on his missionary journeys. The substance of the mysterious document then follows.<\/p>\n<p>In chapters 3–6, Paul is said to have received a message from God announcing how all creation is subject to God with the exception of man himself. Chapters 7–10 relate how the guardian angels of each man and woman report every morning and evening to God concerning the deeds of those in their charge. Some are very good, while others are exceedingly wicked. In chapters 11–18, Paul is taken up in the Holy Spirit to the third heaven and asks to see the souls of the righteous and sinners as they leave the world. The angel accompanying Paul shows him a righteous man leaving the world, an ungodly man, and the soul of one who thought himself righteous but in fact was not.<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 19–30 describe Paul being lifted up to the third heaven (cf. 2 Cor 12:2-4), where he saw a golden gate flanked by golden pillars upon which were mounted golden tablets containing the names of the righteous. Upon entering paradise he was greeted by Enoch and Elijah and shown things that he could not reveal to others (ch 21; cf. 2 Cor 12:4). From there he was taken to the second heaven and then to the firmament encircled by Ocean (ch 21). There he saw the milk white waters of Lake Acherusia where the city of Christ was located. He was brought to the city in a golden boat while 3,000 angels sang a hymn. At the river of honey he met Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and other prophets (ch 25); at the river of milk he saw the infants slain by Herod (ch 26); at the river of wine he met Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Lot, and Job (ch 27); at the river of oil he met those completely dedicated to God (ch 28). At the center of the city, by a great altar, David sang the hallelujah to God.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s tour of hell is described in chapters 31–44; it is a place of sorrow and distress in which flows a river boiling with fire. In the river, some of the damned were immersed to the knees, others to the navel or lips, depending on the severity of their sins (ch 31). Chapters 34–36 describe the tortures of a presbyter, bishop, and deacon. Throughout this section the most ghastly tortures imaginable are described in detail with great relish. Finally, in chapter 44, Christ decrees that for Paul’s sake there will be no torture on Sundays henceforth.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s angelic travel guide then escorts him to paradise (chs 45–51), where the righteous of all ages are anxious to meet him. He meets the Virgin Mary (ch 46), Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as well as the 12 sons of Jacob (ch 47), Moses, who weeps for the unconverted Jews (ch 48), Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, each of whom describes his martyrdom, Lot and Job (ch 49), Noah (ch 50), Elijah, Elisha, Zechariah and his son, John the Baptist, and Adam (ch 51). The document either ended here or, in alternate versions, with Paul’s miraculous trip to the Mt of Olives where he and the other disciples received the divine commission.<\/p>\n<p>The document is filled with contradictions and inconsistencies and many of the translated versions do not agree with each other in all details. The chief importance of the document is in terms of its glimpses into the thinking of late fourth-century Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PaulPassionof\">Paul, Passion of<\/p>\n<p>A revised Latin version of the apocryphal Martyrdom of Paul, which was part of a larger body of texts called the Acts of Paul. The original Martyrdom is the story of Paul’s resuscitation of Patroclus, Nero’s cupbearer, who had fallen from a window and died during one of Paul’s sermons. Patroclus confesses his new loyalty to Christ before the stunned Nero, who moves quickly to round up all such “soldiers of the great king (Christ).” Paul is included in the purge. The Passion elaborates on the story to include a passage about Seneca’s admiration for Paul and his writings, portions of which Seneca allegedly read to Nero. Also, Paul on the way to his death borrows a kerchief from Plautilla, promising to return it. When the returning soldiers mock her, she shows them the bloodied kerchief.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PaulPassionofPeterand\">Paul, Passion of Peter and<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Peter and Paul, Passion of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PearlHymnofthe\">Pearl, Hymn of the<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Thomas, Acts of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PeterandPaulPassionof\">Peter and Paul, Passion of<\/p>\n<p>This writing comes to us in two forms, both of which are considered to have been written by Marcellus and date from the fifth century. The first form is essentially like the Acts of Peter and Paul. It lays emphasis upon Paul’s journey to Rome. The second gives more attention to the men’s residence in Rome with emphasis upon their stay in the home of a relative of Pontius Pilate. Both emphasize the close relationship between Peter and Paul and their continued and successful opposition to Simon Magus, who claims to be the Christ. Their death sentences are included in the writings but with only a brief account of their martyrdoms.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PeterGospelof\">Peter, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Akhmim Fragment (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PeterPreachingof\">Peter, Preaching of<\/p>\n<p>This document, which has survived only in fragments, appears to have been written early in the second century <span>AD<\/span> in Egypt. While the title does not explicitly claim Petrine authorship, it was understood by Clement of Alexandria (late second century <span>AD<\/span>) to have been an authentic composition by the apostle Peter (<em>Stromata<\/em> 2.15.68). The majority of the fragments of the Preaching of Peter are preserved in the form of brief quotations in the writings of Clement of Alexandria.<\/p>\n<p>The fourth-century church historian Eusebius of Caesarea observed that the Preaching of Peter had not been accepted by any ancient authorities (<em>Historia Ecclesiastica<\/em> 3.3.1-4), though he was probably not aware of its acceptance by Clement. Even though only fragments of the document have survived, they are important in that they reveal a transitional stage in the history of early Christian literature. During the first century, Christian literature, including all of the NT, was written for the consumption of other Christians. During the second century, Christian writers began to feel the need to defend their faith against the criticisms of their pagan and Jewish opponents. A new kind of Christian literature, the apology (meaning “defense”), began to appear in the early second century with the writings of the earliest Christian apologists Quadratus and Aristides. The Preaching of Peter represents a transition from the kind of apologetic writing found in the Acts of the Apostles, the sermons that that book contains, and the writings of the early apologists.<\/p>\n<p>Since Clement quotes randomly from the Preaching of Peter, it is not possible to determine the order in which any of the quotations appeared in the original composition. Some of the major emphases of the document will appear from the following summaries of the quotations of Clement. Peter, according to Clement, called the Lord both “Law and Word” in the “Preaching” (<em>Stromata<\/em> 1.29.182; 2.15.68). Mankind must recognize that <em>one<\/em> God created the beginning of all things and has the power to bring all things to an end (<em>Stromata<\/em> 6.5.39-41). The pagans, whom the author of the Preaching of Peter opposed, held that the universe was uncreated and eternal. God, the author contends, is invisible, incomprehensible, needs nothing, is inconceivable, everlasting, imperishable, and uncreated. This God must not be worshiped in the manner of the Greeks, for they have foolishly fashioned images of ordinary materials and worship them as gods. Further, they take animals that should be used for food and sacrifice them to these idols. The worship of the Jews should not be emulated either, for they revere angels, archangels, months, and the moon. If any of the nation of Israel should repent, they will find forgiveness (<em>Stromata<\/em> 6.5.43). In one place the Preaching of Peter narrates how the Lord sent disciples to preach the gospel throughout the world after the resurrection (<em>Stromata<\/em> 6.6.48), though the precise connection between this narrative and the preceding apologetic statements is not clear. It may be that the document began with a special version of the great commission. Elsewhere the document states that the OT prophets speak of Christ, sometimes in parables and enigmas, yet at other times very clearly and directly (<em>Stromata<\/em> 6.15.128). In fact, the major events of the life of Christ, his coming, torture, crucifixion, death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven were predicted in detail by the prophets.<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the surviving fragments of the Preaching of Peter lies in the way in which they reveal how early second-century Christianity turned from a defensive to an offensive position in its proclamation of the gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PeterSlavonicActsof\">Peter, Slavonic Acts of<\/p>\n<p>An account of the later travels of Peter and his subsequent death in Rome preserved for us only in the Slavonic language. According to this account, a child (Jesus) comes to Peter and bids him to go to Rome. The angel Michael is captain of the ship taking them to Rome. After their arrival in Rome, Peter tells the child to catch some fish, whereupon he catches 12,000 in one hour. Then the child is sold to a Roman noble, Aravistus, for 50 pieces of gold. The child silences his teachers. After a vision of angels, the entire household is baptized. Nero arrests Peter, whereupon the child rebukes him. Many dead are raised, but the child sends them back to their graves to await the resurrection by Michael. Peter is crucified head downward. When the child reveals he is Jesus, the nails fall from Peter’s body, he prays for the forgiveness of his executioners, and then he dies. Such apocryphal versions of the acts of early church leaders are characteristically filled with fanciful acts of the apostles and their contact with the Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PetersLettertoPhilip\">Peter’s Letter to Philip<\/p>\n<p>This letter is part of the Christian Gnostic material discovered in 1947 at Nag Hammadi. It probably dates from the late second or early third century. The letter takes its name from a segment at the beginning of the tractate in which Peter claims to have sent the material to Philip. The letter is written in a dialogue form common in Gnostic literature. The body of the writing consists of a series of questions that are asked by the apostles of the risen Lord and the answers given by him. The questions provide a basis for the exposition of Gnostic philosophy about the structure of the world revealed by the Divine Light. That Light is the Christ, who is the heavenly Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PilateActsof\">Pilate, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>This document is an apocryphal passion gospel that reached its present form by the middle of the fourth century <span>AD<\/span>. The first Christian writer to refer to the Acts of Pilate was Epiphanius, an ecclesiastical heresy hunter, who wrote a lengthy denunciation of various heresies in <span>AD<\/span> 375, in which he definitely mentioned the Acts of Pilate (<em>Heresies<\/em> 50.1). Much earlier, Justin Martyr had referred to Pilate’s report to Tiberius regarding the trial of Jesus (<em>I Apology<\/em> 35; 48), but he does not seem to be referring to the Acts of Pilate. Toward the end of the second century <span>AD<\/span>, a generation after Justin, Tertullian referred to an account sent from Pilate to the emperor Tiberius, yet this cannot be the Acts of Pilate, since Jesus supposedly performed many miracles before the procurator. Although it is not improbable that an earlier version of the Acts of Pilate antedated the fourth century, the present version must be dated to the middle of that century. The original language of the Acts of Pilate was Greek, and translations of it were made into Latin, Coptic, and Armenian. Eusebius, the fourth-century church historian and bishop of Caesarea, condemns what he regarded as a blasphemous account of Pilate, apparently a pagan document calculated to defame Christ (<em>Historia Ecclesiastica,<\/em> 1.9.3; 9.5.1). The Christian Acts of Pilate was probably composed to counter the pagan document.<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of Pilate is a composite document consisting of two main parts. The first part (chs 1–16) purports to be a translation from Hebrew to Greek of an account written by Nicodemus about the events surrounding the passion of Jesus. The second part (chs 17–27), also called “Christ’s Descent into Hell,” vividly describes Christ’s descent into hades to liberate the righteous dead (an imaginative expansion of 1 Pt 3:19 which was itself transformed in the Apostles’ Creed into the phrase “he descended into hell”). After the 14th century <span>AD<\/span>, the whole composition was commonly designated as the Gospel of Nicodemus because of the prominent place that character played in the document.<\/p>\n<p>In the prologue to the Acts of Pilate, a Roman soldier named Ananias claims to have found the Acts of Pilate in Hebrew and to have translated it into Greek in the 18th year of the reign of Emperor Flavius Theodosius (<span>AD<\/span> 425). A quotation of the entire document follows: In the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar (<span>AD<\/span> 29), Nicodemus wrote an account of the events that surrounded the passion, death, and resurrection of Jesus. The Jewish high priests accused Jesus of various religious crimes to Pilate and asked that he be tried. Though unwilling, Pilate sent for Jesus anyway, though in a most gracious manner. When Jesus arrived, the Roman standards bowed to him of their own accords (ch 1). In chapter 2 the Jewish charges against Jesus included: (1) that he was born of fornication, (2) that his birth meant the death of the children of Bethlehem, and (3) that Joseph and Mary fled to Egypt because they counted for nothing among the people of Israel. The charge of fornication was immediately refuted by 12 pious Jews who had witnessed the betrothal of Mary and Joseph. An interview between Pilate and Jesus (modeled after Jn 18:33-38) follows in chapter 3. The Jews charge Jesus with blaspheming God, and Pilate reluctantly turns Jesus over to them (ch 4). Nicodemus then stands up in the Jewish council and urges them to let Jesus go, for if he is not of God his movement will fail (cf. Acts 5:38-39), but the Jews oppose him (ch 5). Then three Jews healed by Jesus testify in his behalf (ch 6), followed by Bernice, the woman healed of the issue of blood (ch 7). The crowd proclaims Jesus a prophet (ch 8). When Pilate offers to release a prisoner, the Jews ask for Barabbas, and Pilate then washes his hands of the matter and has Jesus scourged and crucified with the two criminals, Dysmas and Gestas (ch 9). Jesus is mocked by the crowds, while one criminal (Gestas) is rebuked by the other (ch 10). Jesus’ death is accompanied by a darkening of the sun, which the Jews regard as a normal eclipse (ch 11). Joseph of Arimathea is then seized by the Jews and imprisoned; when they come to execute him he has vanished (ch 12). The guards report the appearance of the angel at the tomb, but are bribed by the Jews to keep silence (ch 12). Three Jews then come from Galilee: Phineas, a priest; Adas, a teacher; and Angaeus, a Levite. They report that they have witnessed the great commission and ascension of Jesus on Mt Malich (ch 14). Nicodemus suggests that the surrounding mountains be checked to see if some spirit has not taken Jesus up only to dash him on the rocks; the Jews find nothing except Joseph of Arimathea in his hometown (ch 15). Joseph is summoned to testify before the council and reveals how the risen Jesus had appeared to him when he was imprisoned and set him free (ch 15). The council decides, after hearing other witnesses, that if Jesus is still remembered after 50 years, the stories must be true (ch 16).<\/p>\n<p>The second document begins with an account of Joseph speaking to the council. Two brothers, he claims, had been raised at the same time as Jesus. The council summons them to give their stories (ch 17). While in hades, the brothers claimed, a great light appeared and Abraham and Isaiah became overjoyed (ch 18). Satan thought that Jesus could be restrained in hades (ch 20); but when the King of Glory arrived, the gates were broken down. Satan was handed over to the angels to be bound (ch 22) and was rebuked by hades for causing the ruin of his kingdom (ch 23). The King of Glory (Christ) then led Adam and the rest of the righteous dead out of hades (ch 24) and to paradise (ch 25), where even the repentant criminal was seen (ch 26). The two brothers claim that they have been sent by the angel Michael to preach the resurrection of Jesus to all mankind.<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of Pilate is a pastiche (collection) of quotations and allusions from the four canonical Gospels, mingled with imaginative and even fantastic additions. It is basically an apologetic document that attempts to defend the truth of the resurrection of Jesus against the counterclaims of pagan and Jewish adversaries. Unfortunately, it has an anti-Semitic tone that was to characterize Christian dramatizations of the events of Passion Week from the fourth century through the end of the Middle Ages.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PistisSophia\">Pistis Sophia<\/p>\n<p>A fourth-century Coptic manuscript (Codex Askewanus) that represents one of the chief Gnostic works extant today. The work, containing four chapters, derives its name from the heroine, Sophia, though only the first half of the work refers to her. This portion relates how Jesus, during the first 11 years after his resurrection, returned to teach his disciples the highest mystery of all: the Treasury of the Light. Jesus returned to the Mt of Olives where he is caught up through the aeons and on his journey comes to the thirteenth aeon where he finds Sophia. She is in sorrow because she has caught a glimpse of the Treasury of the Light but is deceived by Authades (the self-willed), who flashes a false brightness before her, causing her to fall into the hands of the powers of matter. She maintains her hope and faith, however, and after 12 prayers is delivered from Authades and chaos by Jesus who reinstates her at the lower limit of the thirteenth aeon.<\/p>\n<p>The work is in dialogue form—with Jesus answering questions asked by his disciples. The theme is thoroughly Gnostic in its view of salvation that comes by a hidden doctrine that brings illumination.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ProtevangeliumofJames\">Protevangelium of James<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> James, Protevangelium of (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PsalmsofSolomon\">Psalms of Solomon<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Solomon, Psalms of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ResurrectionofChristbyBartholomewBookofthe\">Resurrection of Christ by Bartholomew, Book of the<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Bartholomew, Book of the Resurrection of Christ by (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ReubenTestamentof\">Reuben, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"SibyllineOracles\">Sibylline Oracles<\/p>\n<p>A pseudepigraphal writing comprising originally 15 books, 12 of which are extant in late Greek manuscripts. The word <em>sibyl<\/em> is of Greek origin. It claimed to be an oracle of the gods and generally contained a message of a coming catastrophic event. Some Jews adopted and used this mode of writing for propagation purposes.<\/p>\n<p>The sibyls came from the beginning of the Maccabean period (165 <span>BC<\/span>) and cover a period up to shortly after the destruction of the second temple (<span>AD<\/span> 76). The authors, presumably writing in Alexandria, Egypt, stressed the unity and sovereignty of God. God controlled all events, whereas pagan deities were useless, unable to do anything. “But God is one, most exalted of all, who has made the heaven, the sun, the stars and the moon. . . . He has constituted man as the Divinely appointed ruler of all. You men . . . be ashamed of making gods” (book 2). God controls the history of the nations. The sibyls outline the history of 10 generations from the Assyrian kingdom to the destruction of the second temple and the great earthquake (book 4.47ff.). The third book also contains a section on the devastation and troubles to be experienced before the great judgment. It includes two messianic passages wherein the Messiah introduces an era of peace and prosperity for the faithful: “He will raise up his kingdom for all ages over men. . . . For nothing but peace shall come upon the land of the good” (lines 767, 780). The eternal state is to be reserved for the faithful who will be raised from the dead in a bodily form: “But all who are godly shall live again on earth, when God gives breath and life and grace to them the godly” (book 4.187-190), whereas the ungodly are to be thrown into hell, “And all who have sinned with deeds of impiety a heap of earth shall cover again, and murky Tartarus and the black recesses of hell” (lines 183-186).<\/p>\n<p>The express purpose of the authors of the sibyls was to demonstrate the reasonableness of the Jewish faith by casting their message in the form of the sibyl, introduced by the Greeks and appreciated by the Romans. In their emphasis on the God of Israel and their opposition to paganism, they nevertheless stand in the stream of the apocalyptic, the unveiling of God’s secrets of past and future. The sibyl as divine oracle was, thus, used as a literary form in order to convey a message to the non-Jewish world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"SilvanusTeachingsof\">Silvanus, Teachings of<\/p>\n<p>Literary work of the Gnostics, attributed to Silvanus, the companion of Peter and Paul. It was discovered at Chenoboskion in Upper Egypt in 1946.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"SimeonTestamentof\">Simeon, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"SlavonicActsofPeter\">Slavonic Acts of Peter<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Peter, Slavonic Acts of (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"SolomonPsalmsof\">Solomon, Psalms of<\/p>\n<p>The Psalms of Solomon are a collection of 18 songs attributed to Solomon. They are considered pseudepigrapha. The psalms were probably written by one author, who lived during the middle of the first century <span>BC<\/span> and wrote in Hebrew. The theological perspective of the author is Pharisaic in its views of the law, judgment, and the future of Israel. The Psalms of Solomon are derived from the canonical book of Psalms in their form and phraseology. One of the similarities in the form and phraseology is the emphasis on the antithesis between the righteous and the wicked. The wicked are the Gentiles who defile the holy things of the Lord (2:3) and apostate Jews who have fallen into sin (3:11, 13).<\/p>\n<p>The character of the sinner is that of the fool, as opposed to the wise man (cf. Wisdom Literature). The fool has no concern for the Lord (4:1); his speech and deeds betray his unrighteousness (4:2ff.). He is known by his lies, judgment of others, false oaths, his immorality, lawlessness, and selfish ambitions at the cost of others (cf. 12). The righteous are the wise, who fear the Lord (4:26). He is not dismayed by bad dreams or perilous times (6:4-5). He is provoked with zeal for the Lord’s righteousness, as he witnesses the desecration of the temple and the law (8:28). The Lord’s love of him is expressed in discipline, and he responds to the Lord’s rebuke with repentance for his sins. The author compares the righteous to the tree of life in Paradise. They are stable and will not be uprooted (14:2ff.). The wicked, on the other hand, will not be remembered in this life, and God will deal righteously with them by casting them into “Sheol and darkness and destruction” (14:6; 15:10).<\/p>\n<p>The author views God as the King who mightily rules over the nations (2:34ff.) with readiness to judge his enemies and the enemies of the righteous (2:38ff.; 4:9) and to vindicate the righteous (2:39). As the Lord’s care is demonstrated in his sustenance of nature (5:11-12), in his raising up kings, rulers, and nations (5:13), the author assures the reader that his care extends particularly to the poor and those who call upon him (5:2-3, 13). He is the hope of the righteous (8:37).<\/p>\n<p>In view of the foregoing belief in the righteous kingship of God and in his protection of the righteous, the psalms abound in the conviction that evil will be overcome by God’s intervention on behalf of the righteous. The particular context in which these psalms originated was Pompey’s entrance into Jerusalem and his desecration of the temple (63 <span>BC<\/span>), and it was hoped that at the death of Pompey (48 <span>BC<\/span>, cf. 2:30ff.) the messianic era might be introduced. Therefore, the author reminds God of the covenant made with David (17:5) and asks God’s forgiveness for Israel’s sins in the past. Israel has suffered gentile invasions and control as the result of God’s judgment (17:6). Since Pompey had died, the author prayed for the restoration of the theocracy under a Davidic king—“Behold, O Lord, and raise up unto them their king, the son of David. All the time in the which Thou seest, O God, that he may reign over Israel Thy servant” (17:23). By means of the Davidic Messiah the land will be purged of sinners, godless nations, and the righteous will be sanctified. The messianic rule extends only over the righteous remnant, who when restored to the land, will be divided into the 12 tribes; the Davidic Messiah will rule over the tribes and the other nations “in the wisdom of his righteousness” (17:29-31). The sojourner and the gentile nations will not share in the glory of the kingdom. Rather, their position will be that of servitude.<\/p>\n<p>The hope of the glorious future of Israel is the apocalyptic element in the psalms. They arose in a historical context, but they anticipate a radically new future. The psalmist pronounced a benediction on all those who would witness God’s judgment on the nations, the restoration of Israel, and the introduction of the messianic kingdom: “Blessed be they that shall be in those days, in that they shall see the good fortune of Israel which God shall bring to pass in the gathering together of the tribes. May the Lord hasten His mercy upon Israel! The Lord Himself is our king for ever and ever” (17:50-51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"SolomonTestamentof\">Solomon, Testament of<\/p>\n<p>The Testament of Solomon is a second-century <span>BC<\/span> pseudepigraphal writing. The writing claims that Solomon was the writer of the testament. It is extant in Semitic manuscripts, and in some Greek texts.<\/p>\n<p>The material is basically Christian with emphasis on the cross and the virgin birth but also contains Jewish material as well. The testament recounts how Solomon, by means of a ring given to him by the archangel Michael, is able to subdue and use the skills of demons to build his temple. After completing the temple, however, Solomon is led into idolatry on account of his lust for a Shunammite girl. His fall was taken by the author of the testament as an occasion to warn the readers of the power and shapes of the demons and the angels having power over them. The work is written in the form of a testament in order to let Solomon reflect (on his deathbed) how he succeeded and failed as a legacy to Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"TestamentsoftheTwelvePatriarchs\">Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs<\/p>\n<p>Part of the Jewish pseudepigrapha. This particular composition is called a “testament” because it represents the deathbed speeches of each of the sons of Jacob. The testaments start with Reuben’s speech to his sons and ends with Benjamin’s testament to his heirs. Each patriarch is represented as gathering his sons around him and relating the important events of his life. During the speech the patriarch warns against particular vices and attitudes and recommends certain virtues. The advice and warnings of each patriarch often include insight and predictions concerning sin and salvation for his children. The account of the patriarch’s life serves as a guide for the future of his descendants. At the end of the speech, each patriarch dies and is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<p>It would appear that the concept of “testament” finds its orientation in Joshua 23–24, where Joshua summons the elders, heads, judges, and officers of Israel (Jos 23:2; 24:1) and gives them a charge before his death. First Kings 2:1-12 portrays David giving Solomon deathbed advice to walk in God’s ways. The speeches of the patriarchs find further scriptural reference in Genesis chapter 49, where Jacob calls his sons together to hear about their future. At the end of the speech Jacob dies (Gn 49:33).<\/p>\n<p>The present textual form (Slavonic, Armenian, and Greek versions) probably came about sometime during the second or third century <span>AD<\/span>. However, much of the material would appear to go back to the second or third century <span>BC<\/span>. The general scholarly consensus is that an original text in a Semitic language (either Hebrew or Aramaic) was composed by an author or authors sometime in the third or second century before the common era. At some later period, Christian sections were added to the original text. For examples of the Christian sections see Testament of Simeon 6:7; Testament of Levi 10:2; Testament of Dan 6:9; Testament of Naphtali 4:5; Testament of Asher 7:3-4; Testament of Joseph 19:11; Testament of Benjamin 3:8; 9:2-4. It would appear that the testaments may have been reworked by a Jewish writer(s) and by other Christian writers over the centuries. Thus we have a Jewish document from about the third century before the common era that has undergone both Jewish and Christian redactions over a long period of time. These testaments became quite popular in the tenth century, with special interest being displayed in the prophecies of the patriarchs and their secret knowledge.<\/p>\n<p>The following is a summary of each of the testaments of the patriarchs. The excerpts are based on R. H. Charles’s <em>Pseudepigrapha,<\/em> pp 282-367.<\/p>\n<h6>Reuben<\/h6>\n<p>The testament of Reuben is very much influenced by an overwhelming memory of defiling his father’s bed. This refers to Reuben taking his father’s concubine Bilhah while she was in a drunken stupor. Reuben has very strong opinions regarding what he considers to be negative attributes of women, and he warns his sons to be guarded in their relationship with women. His comments on women probably reflect the ill feelings that existed between himself and Jacob in regard to Bilhah. Reuben predicts that in the future his sons would be jealous of the sons of Levi but they would not be able to overthrow them. He admonishes his descendants to have respect and love for one another and to do truth to their neighbors. Reuben is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Simeon<\/h6>\n<p>The patriarch Simeon is presented as a strong warrior type. Reflecting the biblical account of Joseph being sold into slavery (Gn 37:25-28), Simeon testifies that he wanted to kill Joseph rather than sell him into slavery. As punishment for this attitude, God withered his right hand for seven days. Simeon warns his sons against envy, deceit, and fornication. He predicts that they will attempt to harm the sons of Levi but prophesies that the sons of Levi will remain superior. Simeon looked forward to a blissful era (6:4-7a), when the “Most High” would be blessed. Verse 7b is a Christian interpolation, “Because God has taken a body and eaten with men and saved men.” He admonishes his sons to obey the sons of Levi and Judah, for it would be from them that their salvation would be accomplished. He predicts that a high priest would come from Levi and a king would descend from the lines of Judah. Simeon concludes his testament by predicting that all Gentiles (an interpolation) and Israel would be saved.<\/p>\n<h6>Levi<\/h6>\n<p>Levi’s deathbed testament is in the form of dreams that he relates to his sons. He predicts that from his descendants and those of Judah the Lord would “appear among men” to save every race of men (2:11). The descendants of Levi would be “as the sun to all the seed of Israel” (4:3b) and in one dream it is shown that the blessings of the priesthood would come to his sons (8:2-3). Levi predicts that a king would arise in Judah; this king would establish a new priesthood that ministers to both Jews and Gentiles. The tenth chapter has a Christian interpolation that because of ungodliness and transgression, the sons of Levi would wrong “the Savior of the world, Christ” (10:2) and that for this they would be scattered throughout the world. Chapter 13 has a number of wisdom themes with emphasis on the need to follow and obey the law. Chapter 16 introduces an eschatological prediction that the sons of Levi would go astray for 70 weeks. The following chapter gives a detailed account of the 70 weeks in which there would be a priesthood for each jubilee. The first priesthood would be great, and the priest’s relationship to God would be such that God would be addressed as father. The second priesthood would “be conceived in the sorrow of beloved ones” (17:3), but this priesthood will be glorified by all. The following five priesthoods would be characterized by sorrow, pain, hatred, and darkness. However, a new priesthood would eventually arise and peace will be brought to all the earth (18:4); sin shall come to an end (18:9), for this new priesthood shall have a spirit of understanding and sanctification resting upon him. The testament closes with an admonition to choose either the law of the Lord or the work of Beliar (variant of Belial). The sons pledge themselves to the law, and following Levi’s death they bury him at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Judah<\/h6>\n<p>At the beginning of the testament by Judah he tells his descendants that he had been promised by his father that he would be king. “And it came to pass, when I became a man, that my father blessed me, saying, You shall be a king, prospering in all things” (1:6). Judah reminisces about his early youth and his ability to conquer wild animals. He obeyed the commandments and did not give in to lust. He predicted that his descendants would fall into wickedness because of the love of money and the enticement of beautiful women (ch 17). In chapter 21 Judah predicts that the Lord would give the kingship to his descendants and the priesthood to the sons of Levi. Chapter 24 includes a Christian messianic redaction. It is predicted that from the star of Jacob one will arise that will be without sin and from it a rod of righteousness will grow to the Gentiles (24:6). The testament concludes with eschatological hope for the future when “they who are poor for the Lord’s sake shall be made rich and they who are put to death for the Lord’s sake shall awake to life” (25:4). Judah dies and is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Issachar<\/h6>\n<p>The last words of this patriarch are somewhat unique in that Issachar is depicted as being “upright” and without transgression (unlike many of his brothers). He predicts that the priesthood will come from Levi and the kingship will arise from the lineage of Judah. In chapter 6 Issachar predicts that his children will “cleave” after Beliar. If they recognize the mercy of God and follow Issachar’s exemplary life, “every spirit of Beliar will flee from them.” His final request is that he be buried at Hebron with his fathers.<\/p>\n<h6>Zebulun<\/h6>\n<p>The patriarch Zebulun begins his testament by characterizing himself as a “good gift” to his parents. He, like Issachar, indicates that he is not conscious of sinning “except in thought” (and if he has any iniquity it is only the sin of ignorance). Zebulun claims that he did not support the actions taken against Joseph, and he would have told his father about Joseph’s plight except that the other brothers agreed that if “anyone should declare the secret, he should be slain” (1:6). In 1:7 he declares that if it were not for him the other brothers would have killed Joseph. The brothers were so suspicious of Zebulun that they watched him until Joseph was sold. Verse 5:3 has a familiar theme that is found in the NT and in the rabbis: “Have compassion in your hearts, my children, because even as a man does to his neighbor, even so will the Lord do to him.” Zebulun believes that this lesson is demonstrated in practical terms. The sons of the other brothers were sickened and died on account of the action taken against Joseph (“because they showed no mercy in their hearts,” 5:5). The sons of Zebulun were preserved without sickness. He continues his wisdom teaching (8:3) by declaring that in the degree that a man has compassion upon his neighbor the Lord in the same degree will have mercy on him. Zebulun predicts the division between the northern and southern kingdoms and the eventual conquest of these kingdoms by the Gentiles. However, the people will repent and the Lord will bring them back to “the land” and Jerusalem (9:8). In chapter 10 Zebulun predicts that after his death he will “arise as a ruler in the midst of his sons” (10:2), and he promises reward for those who keep the laws and punishment for the ungodly. Zebulun dies at the end of his testament and is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Dan<\/h6>\n<p>The patriarch Dan laments his jealousy of Joseph and indicates that he was controlled by the spirit of Beliar. He reveals that he wanted to kill Joseph so that he could have the love of his father. Dan warns against the spirits of lying and anger, and he exhorts his descendants to love truth and long-suffering. He admonishes them to keep the commandments and “love the Lord through all your life and one another with a true heart” (5:3). Dan predicts that his sons will “in the last days” depart from the Lord and thus provoke the anger of the sons of Levi. They also will fight against the sons of Judah. His sons will not win against the sons of Levi and Judah because an angel of the Lord will guide them. Dan is represented as having read in the book of Enoch (a favorite reference for the patriarchs) that Satan and all the spirits of wickedness and pride will cause the sons of Levi, Judah, and Dan to sin. They will be taken into captivity where they will receive the plagues of Egypt and all the evils of the Gentiles. However, when they return to the Lord they will receive mercy and be given peace. The prediction is such that there would be one who would arise from the tribe of Judah and Levi who is called “the salvation of the Lord.” It would appear that the “one arising” would make war against Beliar and execute an “everlasting vengeance” against their enemies (5:10). Dan’s final warning is to beware of Satan and his spirits and to draw near to God and the angel “that intercedes for you” (6:2). The last section admonishes Dan’s sons to pass on to their children all that they have heard so that “the savior of the Gentiles may receive” them. There follows a Christian polemic about the savior being true, long-suffering, meek, and lowly (6:9). When Dan dies, he is buried near Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.<\/p>\n<h6>Naphtali<\/h6>\n<p>Naphtali is said to be 130 years old when he gives his last words. He is depicted as being in good health, but the morning after a feast realizes that he is going to die. Thus he gathers his sons about him. Naphtali has a very strong sense of order that contributes to the makeup and actions of man as well as the universe. He views the “Gentile problem” as their forsaking the Lord and changing their order so that they obeyed the “stocks and stones.” The change of order was the problem at Sodom and it also caused the Flood.<\/p>\n<p>Naphtali reads from the book of Enoch that his sons will depart from the Lord and walk “according to all lawlessness of the Gentiles” (4:1). He predicts that his descendants will be taken captive because of their sins and afterward a “few” will return to the Lord and he will bring them back to their land. After their return to the land, Naphtali predicts that his sons will forget the Lord and “become ungodly” with the result that they will be scattered all over the earth. They will remain in this state until the compassion of the Lord comes and a man working righteousness and mercy comes to them. Naphtali recounts two dreams that he had in his 40th year. In the first dream he saw the sun and moon stand still. Isaac told his grandsons to run and take hold of the sun and moon, each according to his strength. Levi took hold of the sun, and Judah seized the moon. Both of them were lifted up with the sun and moon. There appeared a bull in the dream with two great horns and eagle wings. The other sons attempted to seize this bull but could not. However, Joseph came and took hold of the bull and ascended “up with him on high” (5:7).<\/p>\n<p>There follows a prediction that the 12 tribes of Israel would be taken into captivity by the Assyrians, Medes, Persians, Chaldeans, and Syrians. The other dream saw a ship sailing on the sea of Jamnia without sailors or pilot. Written on the ship was the inscription “The ship of Jacob” (6:2). Jacob and his sons were on the ship, and when a storm arose Jacob departed from their presence. Eventually the ship breaks up from the pounding of the sea, and while Joseph sails off in a little boat the rest of the brothers are divided among nine planks with Levi and Judah sharing a plank. It would appear that by the prayers of Levi all the brothers eventually land safely on the shore. When Naphtali relates these dreams to his father, Jacob responds that all these things must be fulfilled.<\/p>\n<p>Naphtali admonished his sons to be united to Levi and Judah for through them “shall salvation arise to Israel” (8:2). Also through Levi and Judah the righteous of the Gentiles shall be gathered. Naphtali died and was buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Gad<\/h6>\n<p>The patriarch Gad is represented as hating Joseph because Joseph had told his father that Gad and some of the other brothers were eating from the best of the flocks while tending them. During his testament Gad confesses his sin of hatred to his sons and warns them against harboring hatred because it only brings anguish: “For as love would quicken even the dead and would call back them that are condemned to die, so hatred would slay the living and those that had sinned venially it would not suffer to live” (4:6).<\/p>\n<p>Repentance is understood to give knowledge to the soul and leads the mind to salvation. Gad encourages his sons to honor the lineage of Levi and Judah, for therein is found the salvation of Israel. He predicts that his sons will walk in all wickedness and corruption and ends on a somewhat pessimistic note by asking to be buried near his fathers. Gad is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Asher<\/h6>\n<p>Asher is very conscious of good and evil spirits and the choice that man has to make between these two possibilities. Asher predicts that his descendants will act ungodly and not give heed to the law of God. Thus they will be delivered into the hands of their enemies and they will be scattered. They will exist in such a state until the “Most High” visits the earth “coming Himself [as man with men eating and drinking] . . . he shall save Israel and all the Gentiles” (7:3-4). This Christian interpolation is followed by a declaration that the Lord will gather them because of his mercy and for the sake of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. When Asher dies, he is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Joseph<\/h6>\n<p>Joseph calls himself the “beloved of Israel,” (1:2) and although he has seen envy and death, he did not go astray. During his testament he tells of his ordeal of being sold into slavery. The verses in chapter one are set in parallelism with the first half of the verse telling the plight of Joseph and the second half exalting the security of the Lord: “I was sold into slavery, and the Lord of all made me free: I was taken into captivity, and his strong hand succoured me. I was beset with hunger and the Lord himself nourished me” (1:5). Joseph details his experiences in Egypt with eight chapters being given to the temptations of the Egyptian woman. However, Joseph resisted her advances and the Lord rewarded him for his convictions. He admonishes his sons to have the fear of the Lord in all their works because whoever does the law of the Lord will be loved by him. This is the key to his success. Joseph encourages his children to do well to anyone who would do evil to them and pray for their enemies. He gives his attitude toward his brothers as an example of such a virtue.<\/p>\n<p>Joseph admonishes his sons to observe the commandments of the Lord and honor Levi and Judah for “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, who saves all the Gentiles and Israel” (19:11) shall arise from them. He predicts the enslavement in Egypt but also the eventual deliverance. He directs his sons to take his bones with them when they leave Egypt, and the testament indicates that Joseph was buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Benjamin<\/h6>\n<p>The last patriarch gives his testament when he is 125 years old. He encourages his children to love the Lord and keep his commandments. He urges them to follow the goodness of Joseph, for he did not want his brothers’ actions against him to be counted as sin. Benjamin predicts that in Joseph shall the prophecy be fulfilled “concerning the Lamb of God and Savior of the world, and that a blameless one shall be delivered up for lawless men, and a sinless one shall die for ungodly men in the blood of the covenant, for the salvation of the Gentiles and of Israel and shall destroy Beliar and his servants” (3:8). One can immediately see how the Christian interpolation would find easy access for a polemic in this testament. Joseph is depicted as suffering in innocence and without remorse. Likewise the Christian messiah would suffer and die for ungodly men.<\/p>\n<p>Benjamin believes that there are evildoers among his sons; from his reading of the book of Enoch he predicts that they will commit “fornication with the fornication of Sodom” and only a few will survive (9:1). There would appear to be a remnant from each tribe as the 12 tribes and the Gentiles will gather at the last temple. Their salvation will be a result of the “Most High” sending his only “begotten prophet” (9:2), and he will be lifted up upon a tree and the veil of the temple shall be rent and the Spirit of God shall be passed on to the Gentiles. Benjamin admonishes his sons that if they walk in holiness according to the commandments of the Lord, all of Israel will be gathered to the Lord. When Benjamin dies, he is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<p>From the brief account of each patriarch, it is apparent that the testaments were subject to both Jewish and Christian redaction and go beyond mere interpolation. The text reflects such characteristics as two messiahs, a double love commandment, ethical and theological teachings, as well as universal salvation. However, it is most difficult to place these features within a particular time period or even religion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ThaddeusActsof\">Thaddeus, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>A sixth-century version and extension of the fifth-century Syriac Doctrina Addaei, or Legend of Abgar. The Legend contains a purported exchange of letters between Abgar, king of Edessa (<span>AD<\/span> 9–46), and Jesus. This exchange results in the sending of Thaddeus, one of Jesus’ apostles, to Edessa. While there, he performs numerous miracles including the healing of Abgar. The Acts has Abgar healed when Ananias, his messenger, returns prior to the arrival of Thaddeus. The Acts focuses on the activity of Thaddeus in establishing the church in Edessa.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"TheclaActsofPauland\">Thecla, Acts of Paul and<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Paul and Thecla, Acts of (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ThomasActsof\">Thomas, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of Thomas is one of a cluster of acts of the apostles that have three common characteristics. They narrate the propagation of the gospel around the ancient world, promote the deeds and words of one of the apostles, and inevitably chronicle that apostle’s martyrdom. The oldest of these “acts narratives” are those of Paul, John, Andrew, Peter, and Thomas. Acts of Thomas, like the others, is a blend of Christian piety, the popular Hellenistic romances of the day, and Jewish haggadic-type moralistic teachings.<\/p>\n<p>Scholarly study of the Acts of Thomas suggests that it was probably written at the beginning of the third century. It was definitely written in Syriac first and probably by someone with strong tendencies toward the Gnostic heresy. It proved broadly popular among Gnostics, Manichees, and orthodox churches, so much so that it was quickly translated from the original Syriac into Arabic, Armenian, and several Greek translations. From these varied Greek versions, Coptic, Latin, and Ethiopic translations were made. Significant portions of the Coptic version were in turn retranslated back into Arabic, Ethiopic, and Greek, thus creating a most confusing textual tradition. Only one full early Syriac text survives, and it is considered less reliable than some of the extant Greek translations.<\/p>\n<p>In the critical English edition of the Acts of Thomas, that of A. F. J. Klijn published in 1962, the narrative is divided into the traditional acts (praxeis). There are 13 of these numbered in 170 sequential chapters that include the concluding martyrdom of the apostle. Various liturgical pieces, sermon fragments, and hymns are inserted, including two particularly famous hymns in the early church—that of the “Song of the Bride” in act 1 and that of the “Song of the Pearl” in act 9. The first six acts are not woven together by any particular theme, and they record that Thomas went on board ship to go to India (act 3), which would imply a south Indian ministry. Yet the text speaks of ministry to the north Indian king, Gundaphoro (act 4). However, acts 7 through 13 and the martyrdom are set in the south Indian kingdom of Mazdai and are obviously written by one hand. It is probable that the first six acts represent earlier materials placed into the whole by the writer of the last seven acts and the martyrdom. This document is the first-known mention of the traditions that Thomas ministered in India, was martyred there, and that his bones were returned to Edessa. Acts of Thomas is written, as are all the apocryphal acts of the apostles, on the assumption that the world was divided among the apostles for evangelization and that India fell to Thomas.<\/p>\n<p>Thomas is called Judas Thomas throughout these acts after the Syrian style of referring to that apostle. Thomas is spoken of as the twin of Jesus (the Didymus of the NT), as recipient of special divine revelations, and as being Jesus incarnate in the flesh again—in chapters 10, 11, 39, 47, and 48 of the Acts. Many historians think these are clear indications of Gnostic thought. Others think such ideas are expressions of Jesus’ adaptation to human perception and identification with his apostles—features often found in early Christian literature. There seems to be no question but that Gnostic or Manichee tendencies were gradually edited out of Greek and Latin texts by orthodox copyists.<\/p>\n<p>One quickly gets the feel for this narrative. The Acts of Thomas opens with Judas Thomas’s refusing to go to India. He is then sold as a slave—in parallel to Christ’s coming as a slave to redeem man. So Thomas reaches India as a carpenter (again the parallel with Jesus) and a builder of homes. He plays groomsman in a wedding at which miracles convince the flute player of Thomas’s role as apostle of God; so the king asks Thomas to pray for his daughter. Great stress is placed on purity in Thomas’s teaching, and this usually involves sexual abstinence as well. Finally, many are converted, including the king, and they form an assembly of believers in Sandaruk.<\/p>\n<p>In the second act the king, Gundophor, gives Thomas a large sum of money to build a palace. After surprising the king by tracing the palace on the ground in winter, Thomas builds him a palace in heaven by giving the money to the poor. The king imprisons and decides to kill Thomas for the supposed deception; but the king’s brother, Gad, dies and goes to heaven where he sees the palace and desires to buy it. Gad is then reunited with his body and tries to buy the palace from Gundophor, whereupon Gundophor learns that he cannot sell it, releases Thomas from prison, and advises Gad to arrange to have his own palace built in heaven. Thomas gives a great doxology (ch 25 of act 2), and the two brothers who have come to believe through all of this want to be baptized.<\/p>\n<p>In these miracle narratives and teachings, all the books of the NT seem to be echoed, though there are relatively few direct quotations. Favorite miracle passages such as Balaam’s talking donkey and Peter’s release from prison are reexperienced in Thomas’s life with vast embellishment. The talking ass enters a home and casts out a demon at Thomas’s command; Thomas causes great consternation by repeatedly passing in and out of the securely closed prison. Such miracles, sufferings, and conversions make up acts 3 through 13 and continue to the climax of Judas Thomas’s ministry. His martyrdom occurs (ch 168) at the hands of four soldiers with spears who have been ordered by the king of Mazdai to execute Thomas. He thereafter appears to his followers who have Thomas’s bones removed to Edessa. Meantime, the son of the king of Mazdai becomes sick unto death. Desperate, the king goes to Thomas’s tomb, thinking to get a relic to heal his son. Finding the body gone, he uses the very dust upon which Judas Thomas’s body rested, and his son is healed. Thereafter the king becomes a believer and joins the community of believers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ThomasGospelof\">Thomas, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>A noncanonical and heretical gospel of Gnostic origin that probably dates from the second or third century <span>AD<\/span>. It is one of a large number of similar writings that flourished among early religious sects such as the Marcosians (a second-century group that built an elaborate sacramental system around numbers) and the Manicheans (a third-century dualistic heresy based on the primeval conflict between light and darkness). In fact, Cyril of Jerusalem, who died in <span>AD<\/span> 386 says the Gospel of Thomas was written by “one of those wicked disciples of Mani” (the founder of Manichaeism). Along with the Protevangelium of James, it is one of the oldest and most widely known of the more than 50 apocryphal gospels that circulated within the churches during the period of their early growth and expansion.<\/p>\n<p>This Gospel of Thomas (sometimes referred to as an “infancy gospel”) should not be confused with the Coptic version that was unearthed in 1945 near Nag Hammadi in Upper Egypt. The latter is a collection of 114 “sayings of Jesus,” which shed a great deal of light on the influence of Gnosticism on Egyptian Christianity. They claim to be the “secret words” of Jesus transmitted by “Didymos Judas Thomas.” The Gospel of Thomas, with which this article deals, is composed of a series of childhood miracles of Jesus and is preserved for us in four versions—two in Greek (one quite a bit longer than the other), one in Latin, and one in Syriac.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of Thomas was apparently known as early as Hippolytus (<span>AD<\/span> 155–235), who quotes it as saying, “He who seeks me will find me in children from seven years old; for there will I, who am hidden in the fourteenth aeon, be found.” Hippolytus claimed that it was used by the Naasenes (a Gnostic sect that worshiped the serpent) in support of their doctrine of the nature of the inward man. The quotation above is not found in the extant versions, but this is understandable because there is evidence from the Stichometry of Nicephorus (possibly fourth century) that an earlier version was over twice the length. The Gospel of Thomas was known both to Origen (c. <span>AD<\/span> 185–254) and Eusebius (c. <span>AD<\/span> 260–340). The latter classed it with the heretical writings and said it should be “rejected as altogether absurd and impious” (<em>Historia Ecclesiastica<\/em> 3.25).<\/p>\n<p>The stories that make up the Gospel of Thomas emphasize the miraculous power and supernatural wisdom of the boy Jesus. Some scholars think they were originally fabricated by orthodox Christians in opposition to the Gnostic heresy that the “supernatural Christ” first came upon Jesus at the time of his baptism. It is much more likely, however, that they owe their origin to people’s curiosity about what the boy Jesus must have been like. Some of the tales may have come from pagan sources.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from three or four miracles, which could be classed as beneficial, the supernatural feats said to be performed by the boy Jesus were destructive. For example, when a certain child spoiled some pools made by Jesus, he was cursed by Jesus and totally withered up. Another boy who provoked Jesus by running into him “immediately . . . fell down and died.” A teacher who struck Jesus on the head was straightway cursed and fell to the ground. The French writer Renan referred to the Jesus of the Gospel of Thomas as “a vicious little guttersnipe.”<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the gospel Jesus is presented as infinitely wise. He ridicules his teacher Zacchaeus saying, “You hypocrite, first, if you know it, teach the Alpha, and then we will believe you concerning the Beta.” After Zacchaeus berates himself for being so inferior to the one he intended to take as a disciple, Jesus laughs and announces, “I am come from above that I may curse them.” The text continues, “And no man after that dared to provoke him, lest he should curse him, and he should be maimed.”<\/p>\n<p>Other miracles include making 12 live sparrows out of clay, smiting his accusers with blindness, raising a child from the dead, healing a foot cut in two by an ax, carrying water in a cloth garment, reaping an enormous harvest from one kernal of wheat, stretching a piece of wood to its proper length, and healing his brother James who had been bitten by a viper while gathering fagots (sticks to use as firewood). More miracles may be found in the longer Latin version.<\/p>\n<p>It comes as no surprise that the orthodox church has always rejected from its canon of sacred scripture the apocryphal Gospel of Thomas. It is, however, quoted in other later gospels of the same sort. For example, the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew from chapter 18 on is based upon the Gospel of Thomas. Along with other apocryphal materials, it has exercised a significant influence on Christian art and literature, especially from the tenth century forward. For example, the account of Jesus making the 12 sparrows from clay shows up in the Koran.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"TruthGospelof\">Truth, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>Around 1945 a group of Egyptian peasant farmers near modern Nag Hammadi inadvertently dug into a grave of the ancient village known as Shenesit-Chenoboskion and unearthed a jar containing 13 books (9 of which were largely complete) and 15 fragments of works. This find was the library of an ancient Gnostic sect and contained all or parts of 51 different Gnostic writings—all but two of which had never come into modern scholars’ hands before. Now called the Nag Hammadi or Chenoboskion texts, these works were the first modern find of original Gnostic literature. All are Coptic translations of earlier Greek originals.<\/p>\n<p>Codex I (titled the Jung Codex because it now is owned by the Jung Institute in Vienna) is unique among the 13 works because it is in Sub-Achimimic Coptic, while the rest of the works are in the more usual Sahidic Coptic. Codex I contains five works, two of which are the enormously controversial Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Truth.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of Truth has no heading but rather draws its title from the incipit (first line of the text); it has no author; it contains no addressee. In fact, it is not a gospel at all, but rather a treatise expressive of Valentinian Gnosticism at its very earliest stage. Because the Gnosticism expressed in the Gospel of Truth is lacking all later-Valentinian mythological development and because it is stated simply and in almost orthodox Christian thought forms, the majority of modern scholars credit it to Valentinus himself, though no final proof of this has been discovered as yet. If Valentinus himself did not write this document, then it had to be someone in the immediate circle of his initial disciples.<\/p>\n<p>Valentinus was born in Egypt around <span>AD<\/span> 100 to 110. He received a thorough education at Alexandria, became a Christian, and taught first in Egypt before moving to Rome around <span>AD<\/span> 136, where he stayed until 154 or 155. Tertullian, in his work against heresy, seems to imply that Valentinus was twice expelled from the Roman church; he states that Valentinus was a brilliant and eloquent man who had hopes of becoming a bishop in Rome at one time. Valentinus attracted able followers who later expanded his teachings almost beyond recognition. But when he left Rome sometime after 154 or 155, he had made a final break with orthodoxy and was teaching a form of Gnostic heresy the product of which was the Gospel of Truth, written by himself or someone of his immediate circle. There is a surviving statement that Valentinus taught subsequently in Cyprus, and then he vanishes into the mists of history.<\/p>\n<p>Irenaeus said the Gospel of Truth is no gospel, for it is unlike the four Gospels (<em>Against Heresies<\/em> 3.2.9). Irenaeus was certainly correct, for the work is not a narrative. Nor does the Gospel of Truth contain any story about Jesus, any place name of any type, any date, or any mention of any person other than Jesus, who is only mentioned five times.<\/p>\n<p>More than 60 times, this brief work uses the notions of knowledge or needing to know. This knowledge is born from within as the soul returns to itself, finding there what Deity deposited in it—or perhaps better, finding there the residue of Deity still entrapped within it. Thus whoever has Gnosis has simply taken what is his and can know where he or she comes from and for where he or she is bound. Christ’s role was to present the “Book of the Living” or the “Living Book.” “Book” is understood, not as the gospel proclamation of the life and teachings of Jesus, but rather as the primordial gospel or truth that existed before creation. It was error and ignorance that rebelled against the Savior and nailed him to the tree. Implied in this, though not explicitly stated, is the Gnostic understanding that it was also divine error and ignorance out of which matter emerged or was created. Salvation for living beings entrapped in this matter comes with return to unalloyed Deity. The path of this return is Gnosis (knowledge). The Pleroma, the fullness of the Deity, went out into the depths of matter in search of the elect among beings by way of Jesus and the cross.<\/p>\n<p>While these traits of Gnosticism are clear, this gospel is much closer to orthodoxy than most Gnostic Chenoboskion writings because it mentions only one Son of God, not several emanations; it does not split Jesus into a physical Jesus and a divine Christ; and most strikingly, Sophia, the usual central character in the Gnostic cosmic drama, does not appear at all. It is for these reasons among others that the Gospel of Truth is placed very close to Valentinus’s break with orthodoxy.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of Truth has assumed some degree of importance in NT studies beyond that warranted by its heretical content because it everywhere assumes our full NT canon. By some scholars’ counts, there are no less than 83 places where the Gospel of Truth echoes NT canonical books—in spite of the fact it does not cite a single saying of Jesus directly. Most particularly, it relies heavily on the book of Revelation and the Epistle to the Hebrews.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VirginAssumptionofthe\">Virgin, Assumption of the<\/p>\n<p>A widely circulated legend dealing with the death and translation of the Virgin Mary. None of the many versions is earlier than the fourth century. Most go back to Egypt. In the Coptic versions, Jesus himself appears to Mary before the apostles depart on their missionary labors; Jesus announces her coming death and translation. In the other form an angel makes the announcement. Mary requests the presence of all the apostles, who are miraculously brought on the clouds. Mary is transfigured, and many healings result from contact with her dead body. She is transported to heaven by Jesus shortly after her death.<\/p>\n<p>This legend itself took on a new interest and importance when in 1950 “The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin” was made a part of official Roman Catholic dogma.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VirginLifeofthe\">Virgin, Life of the<\/p>\n<p>There are a number of accounts of the early life and existence of the Virgin Mary. Most of them come to us through Coptic texts. They tell of the birth of Mary to Joachim (also called Cleopas) and Anna, who had been taunted by friends for having no children. Mary was born after a vision of a white dove. In some accounts Mary was dedicated to the Lord and then committed to the care of a man, Joseph. While she was in the house weaving on the veil of the temple, angels would come to minister to her. The annunciation by Gabriel is given at great length. The birth of Jesus is described in detail while Joseph is searching for a midwife, Salome. Other accounts go on to describe tender scenes between Mary and the child Jesus. In some of these versions, there is a reckless identification of the Virgin Mary with all of the other Marys of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ZebulunTestamentof\">Zebulun, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (above).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>APOCRYPHA*<\/h3>\n<p>Books excluded from the canon of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Apocryphal Gospels<\/p>\n<p>• Apocryphal Acts<\/p>\n<p>• Apocryphal Epistles<\/p>\n<p>• Apocalyptic Apocrypha<\/p>\n<p>• Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>The writings of the Old and New Testaments tended to attract certain additional compositions in the form of books, parts of books, letters, “gospels,” apocalypses, and so on. Most of the authors wrote anonymously, but some presented their writings to the public under the name of a familiar OT figure or member of the Christian church. Several of these compositions formed a small but important part of the great body of Jewish literature that emerged during the period between the Old and New Testaments. Much of it was the result of religious and political ferment, for the Jews felt their faith and their very existence threatened, first by the pagan influences of Hellenistic Greek culture, then by the oppression of invading Roman forces.<\/p>\n\n<p>Most of the apocryphal books are also pseudepigrapha—that is, they are books ascribed to a pseudonymous author. In other words, the main characteristic of these writings is the fictitious claim that the author of the book was a biblical person (Enoch, Abraham, Moses, Solomon, Bartholomew, Thomas, etc.) or that the revelation contained in the book was originally given to a biblical character (Adam and Eve, Isaiah). Generally, the pseudepigrapha show a strong interest in the apocalyptic: the creation of the world, the future of Israel and the nations, the glory of God and his angels, the messianic kingdom, and life after death. Many of the pseudepigrapha are Jewish writings that were never accepted by the Jewish or Christian communities. They were written about the time of the Apocrypha (c. 200 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 110), but by the nature of the contents of the pseudepigrapha, they were only recognized by certain groups. Since some of these books approximated counterparts in the canonical Scriptures, there is no doubt that in some circles their authority and inspiration were regarded as similar to that of the scriptural compositions venerated by the Jews and later by Christians.<\/p>\n<p>Other religious writings from that period made no claim to be scriptural. Such compositions preserved the familiar traditions of both Judaism and primitive Christianity, although on occasion they enriched or embellished them by means of legends and unhistorical narratives. Because very few books of any kind were in circulation at that time, the Palestinians tended to read whatever literary material came into their possession. Although the Torah, or law of Moses, had always been recognized as the standard of theological orthodoxy for the Jews, narratives of endurance under persecution or accounts of the way that the enemies of God’s people received their just reward had an obvious attraction for those under the pressures of a pagan society.<\/p>\n<p>In the same way, although the Gospels and Epistles—along with the OT—comprised the basic canon or approved list of Scriptures for Christians, many additional narratives claimed the attention of Christ’s early followers. Those compositions often dealt with the supposed activities of Jesus and his followers, as well as with martyrdoms, revelations, and spiritual teachings. Some works contained material that was not only unhistorical but downright bizarre, but others reflected the spirit of Christ and the apostolic teachings to a certain extent. For the early Christians, as also for the Jews, the establishment of a formal canon of scriptural writings must have been prompted in part by a necessity to separate the record of revealed truth from other written forms of religious tradition as well as from actual heresy.<\/p>\n<p>Writings that failed to gain acceptance into the OT and NT canons were described in the writings of some early Christian scholars by the term “apocrypha.” The Greek word means “hidden things,” and when applied to books it described those works that religious authorities wished to be concealed from the reading public. The reason was that such books were thought to contain mysterious or secret lore, meaningful only to the initiate and therefore unsuitable for the ordinary reader. But the word “apocrypha” was also applied in a less complimentary sense to works that deserved to be concealed. Such works contained harmful doctrines or false teachings calculated to unsettle or pervert rather than edify those who read them. The suppression of undesirable writings was comparatively easy at a time when only a few copies of any book were in circulation at a given time.<\/p>\n<p>By the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, a clear distinction was being made in Jewish circles between writings that were suitable for use by the general public and esoteric works that were to be restricted to the knowledgeable and the initiated. Thus in 2 Esdras 14:1-6, the writer tells how Ezra was supposedly instructed by God to publish openly certain writings (among them the Torah), and keep others secret (that is, apocalyptic traditions dealing with the coming end of the age). In 2 Esdras 14:42-46 reference is made to 70 books, evidently noncanonical material, written after the 24 books of the Hebrew Canon.<\/p>\n<p>Use of the term “apocrypha” to mean “noncanonical” goes back to the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>, when Jerome urged that the books found in the Septuagint and in the Latin Bibles that did not occur in the canon of the Hebrew OT writings should be treated as apocryphal. They were not to be disregarded entirely, since they were part of the great contemporary outpouring of Jewish national literature. At the same time, they should not be used as sources for Christian doctrine but at best for supplementary reading of an uplifting or inspirational nature.<\/p>\n<p>Protestant theologians generally have followed the tradition established by Jerome, regarding the OT apocrypha as the excess of the Septuagint canon over the Hebrew Scriptures. When the Hebrew Bible began to be translated into Greek in Egypt during the reign of Ptolemy II (285–246 <span>BC<\/span>), the scholars concerned included a number of books that, while remaining outside the generally accepted list of Hebrew canonical writings, still had a bearing upon Jewish history and society. That procedure reflected contemporary attitudes in Palestine, where many people did not attempt to separate canonical writings from other forms of religious literature. The decision made by Jewish authorities about what to regard as canonical Scripture naturally had a bearing on what would constitute OT apocrypha.<\/p>\n<p>Textual evidence represented by certain manuscripts and fragments from the Dead Sea caves makes it reasonably certain that the last of the canonical Hebrew writings had been completed several decades before the time Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>) began his conquests in the Near East. The process by which those compositions came to be accepted as canonical was more protracted, however. Only when they had been circulated, read, and assessed favorably by comparison with the spirituality of the Torah were they accorded general canonicity. Hence the distinction between the canonical and apocryphal writings came as much through usage and general consent on the part of orthodox Judaism as through any other manner. Earlier scholars suggested that the so-called Council of Jamnia, held in Palestine about <span>AD<\/span> 100, was responsible for drawing up a list of OT books suitable for use by the faithful. However, subsequent studies have thrown considerable doubt upon the historicity of such a council, at the same time showing that the Jewish authorities of that period considered their noncanonical writings to be more of an obstacle than a help to devotion.<\/p>\n<p>The books the Jews regarded as being specifically outside the Canon, and therefore apocryphal, are as follows: 1 Esdras; 2 Esdras; Tobit; Judith; the additions to Esther; the Wisdom of Solomon; Ecclesiasticus; Baruch; the Letter of Jeremiah; the additions to the book of Daniel (the Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon); the Prayer of Manasseh; 1 Maccabees; and 2 Maccabees. Several Septuagint manuscripts included some pseudohistorical material under the titles of 3 and 4 Maccabees. Therefore, even the Apocrypha varied somewhat in content, depending upon the manuscript tradition being followed. Among early Christian scholars there was also some difference of opinion about the precise limits of canonical Hebrew Scripture, and hence of apocryphal material. A serious break with Hebrew and rabbinic tradition came with the writings of Augustine, who advanced the view that the books of the Apocrypha were of equal authority with the other writings of the canonical Hebrew and Christian Scriptures. A few dissenting voices were raised in support of Jerome’s position, but the views of Augustine were embraced by the Council of Trent (1546) and became official Roman Catholic teaching.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church includes the following works as part of the Deuterocanonical Scriptures: Tobit; Judith; the additions to Esther; the Wisdom of Solomon; Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus ben Sirach; Baruch; the additions to the book of Daniel (the Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon); 1 Maccabees; and 2 Maccabees. (Articles on each of these are interspersed throughout this dictionary.)<\/p>\n<p>Christians of the NT period were already familiar with Jewish apocryphal works, including the apocalyptic speculations found in 2 Esdras. Therefore, it was hardly surprising that a similar body of literature should grow up around their own Scriptures when they began to be composed and circulated. NT apocrypha, however, like its OT counterpart, could be considered only in relationship to an established canon of scriptural writings. Since the earliest catalog of NT writings, the Muratorian Canon, was not compiled until about <span>AD<\/span> 200, a considerable period of time elapsed before an official church statement could appear on what was to be considered NT apocrypha. In the meantime, a large assortment of materials of a predominantly religious nature appeared, purporting to be orthodox in nature and dealing with various aspects of historic Christianity. As events turned out, this apocryphal literature defeated the purposes it was intended to serve.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApocryphalGospels\">Apocryphal Gospels<\/p>\n<p>One major class of apocrypha are the apocryphal gospels. These writings preserved stories about Christ and some teachings, but being mostly fanciful in nature they never became canonical. There are three broad classes:<\/p>\n<p>1. A type similar to the synoptic Gospels, represented by the Gospel of Peter and the Gospel of the Egyptians, as well as papyrus fragments including Oxyrhynchus 840 and Papyrus Egerton 2. Other papyrus collections of sayings show affinities with the canonical Gospels.<\/p>\n<li>2. Gospels that disseminated Gnosticism, a second-century <span>AD<\/span> heresy stressing philosophical knowledge <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>)<\/em> of the cosmos and man. They are often in the form of dialogues between Jesus and his disciples, such as the Coptic Gospel of Thomas, the Apocryphon of John, the Wisdom of Jesus Christ, and the Dialogue of the Redeemer. In this category also come those “gospels” attributed to the Twelve as a group, such as the Memoirs of the Apostles.<\/li>\n<li>3. Infancy gospels, purporting to supply otherwise unknown information of a legendary nature about Christ’s earliest years. Passion gospels also come into this category. These narratives were written to satisfy curiosity about Christ’s birth and childhood or to embellish the canonical accounts of his crucifixion and resurrection.<\/li>\n<p>Because of the scarcity of information about such matters as the childhood, adolescence, and early manhood of Jesus, the “infancy” gospels purport to supply the reader with what was meant to pass for historical fact. Much of the material, however, was entirely within the realm of fantasy and could never have been accepted as fact by any intelligent reader. For example, in the Gospel of Thomas the five-year-old Jesus is accused of breaking the Sabbath by making sparrows of clay beside a stream. When his father Joseph investigates the situation, Jesus claps his hands and the clay birds come to life and fly away chirping.<\/p>\n<p>“Passion” gospels were written to embellish the canonical accounts of Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection. As supplements to Christian teaching, many of the apocryphal writings seemed to be proclaiming ideas that were actually outside the scope of NT doctrine. Attempts to fill in the “hidden years” of Christ’s life had no foundation whatever in the traditions of the Gospels. Works dealing with the last state of unbelievers were embellished in a manner that went far beyond anything stated in the NT. In some notable instances, as in the writings of various Gnostic sects, the authors set out deliberately to propagate heretical teachings they had accepted under the authority of some apostolic figure. The Gospel of Thomas, recovered around 1945 from Nag Hammadi (Chenoboskion) near the Nile River, is an example of an attempt to perpetuate curious sayings and dogmas by attributing them to Jesus, so that they would receive wide currency and acceptance.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApocryphalActs\">Apocryphal Acts<\/p>\n<p>There are also some apocryphal acts, which are purported to be accounts of apostolic achievements not recorded in Scripture. Such “acts” are the source of much tradition, such as Peter’s being crucified upside down and Thomas’s mission to India. The reliability of the traditions is questionable because the writings contain clearly unorthodox material. Yet small fragments of accurate information may be embedded in this mass of largely fictitious literature.<\/p>\n<p>Because of their often heretical character, the church consistently reacted against such books, sometimes even demanding that they be burned (for example, at the Nicene Council of 787). The Acts of John pictured Jesus talking to John on the Mt of Olives during the crucifixion, explaining that it was only a spectacle. In the Acts of Thomas, Jesus appeared in the form of Thomas, exhorting a newly married couple to dedicate themselves to virginity. Sexual abstinence was a dominant theme, reflecting Platonic ideas, which disparaged the physical body.<\/p>\n<p>Many scholars date the earliest work, the Acts of John, before <span>AD<\/span> 150. The major Acts (of John, Paul, Peter, Andrew, and Thomas) were probably written during the second and third centuries. These gave rise to other “acts” that were primarily miracle stories, written more to entertain than to teach.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApocryphalEpistles\">Apocryphal Epistles<\/p>\n<p>A host of apocryphal works are classified as epistles. These generally pseudonymous works originated from many widely separated periods of time. Many other apocryphal works are apocalyptic in nature. These works are supplemented by material such as the Apostolic Constitutions and Canons. Added to these are the Gnostic compositions found at Nag Hammadi, which include works purporting to represent the teachings of Christ as well as “secret” instructions compiled by the Gnostic writers and a few apocryphal compositions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApocalypticApocrypha\">Apocalyptic Apocrypha<\/p>\n<p>Another group could be called apocalyptic apocrypha. The term “apocalypse” means “disclosure” or “revelation,” a term that was generally applied to Christian literature that resembled the Revelation of John, which designates itself an apocalypse in Revelation 1:1. The practice of writing under the name of an illustrious figure of the past, or pseudonymity, was a characteristic device used by most unknown authors of Jewish and Christian apocalypses (the Revelation of John is a striking exception). Jewish apocalypses were attributed to such ancient worthies as Adam, Enoch, Abraham, Moses, Ezra, and others. Similarly, Christian apocalypses written in the second century <span>AD<\/span> and later were ascribed to such important early Christian figures as Peter, Thomas, James and others.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times there emerged in Judaism certain circles that developed an apocalyptic view of history. They provided such writings as the five parts of 1 Enoch, the Assumption of Moses, 2 Esdras, and the Apocalypse of Baruch. These books are of importance to NT study, for they provide a bridge between the OT and the NT concepts of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>The apocalypses were written to answer the problems of theodicy (the justice of God). After the days of Ezra, the law assumed a more important role in the life of the people than before. In prophetic times Israel again and again apostatized from the law and worshiped foreign gods. The primary message of the prophets was to challenge Israel to get right with God and to turn in repentance to keep the law. After Ezra and throughout NT times, Israel was obedient to the law as never before. The Jews abhorred idolatry and faithfully worshiped God. Still the kingdom did not come. Instead came the fearful persecution in the Maccabean times by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the worldly rule of the Hasmoneans, Pompey and Roman hegemony, and in <span>AD<\/span> 66–70, the siege and destruction of Jerusalem. Where was God? Why did he not deliver his faithful people? Why did the kingdom not come? The apocalypses were written to answer questions like these.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most important elements in apocalyptic religion is an explicit dualism, expressed as “this age” and “the age to come.” The prophets contrasted the present time with the future when the kingdom of God would be established. The apocalyptists radicalized this contrast. Twice we find fragments of this idiom in 1 Enoch. We meet the fully developed idiom in 2 Esdras and the Apocalypse of Baruch (late first century <span>AD<\/span>). “The Most High has made not one age but two” (2 Esd 7:50); “the day of judgment shall be the end of this age and the beginning of the immortal age that is to come” (2 Esd 7:113); “this age the Most High has made for many but the age to come for few” (2 Esd 8:1; see also Apoc Bar 14:13; 15:7; <em>Pirke Aboth<\/em> 4:1, 21-22; 6:4-7). Furthermore, the transition from this age to the age to come can be accomplished only by a cosmic act of God. In the apocryphal Assumption of Moses there is no messianic personage; it is God alone who comes to redeem Israel. In the Similitudes of Enoch the transition is accomplished with the coming of a heavenly, preexistent Son of Man. In 2 Esdras we find a conflation of the concepts of Davidic Messiah and the Son of Man.<\/p>\n<p>Apocalyptic differs from OT prophetic religion in that it is pessimistic about the present age. It would be wrong to describe the apocalypses as ultimately pessimistic, for their basic message is that in due time God will intervene and save his people. But for the present, as long as this age lasts, he has removed himself from intervening in Israel’s affairs. The present age is under the power of evil angelic and demonic forces and is irretrievably evil. God has abandoned this age to evil; salvation can be expected only in the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The apocalyptists lost completely the tension between history and eschatology. They no longer expected any deliverance in this age. God had, in fact, become the God of the future, not of the present.<\/p>\n<p>In the dream-visions of Enoch (1 Enoch 83–90), God faithfully guided Israel throughout its history. Then God withdrew his personal leadership, forsook the temple, and surrendered his people to be torn and devoured. God “remained unmoved, though he saw it, and rejoiced that they were devoured and swallowed and robbed, and left them to be devoured in the hand of all the beasts” (1 Enoch 89:58). After the Babylonian captivity God was conceived to be inactive in history. History was surrendered to evil. All salvation was thrust into the future.<\/p>\n<p>Comparative studies have shown that the NT apocryphal writings preserve at best a series of debased traditions about the founder and teachings of early Christianity. At worst, the narratives are entirely devoid of historical value and in some respects are totally alien to NT spirituality. Even where they seem to support a tradition current in some part of the early church, the evidence they present is inferior to what can often be had from other sources. Sometimes the compositions are so trivial and inconsequential that it is difficult to account for their survival. Certain apocryphal writings did in fact become lost and are now known only in the form of quotations in larger works.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, the NT apocryphal compositions are important in indicating what was attractive to the ordinary people of the day. For them an element of the romantic seemed necessary to supplement the body of received spiritual truth. Certain of the stories recounted were vivid and imaginative, and others, such as the apocalypses, provided a form of escapism from harsh temporal realities. No matter what their nature, the NT apocryphal writings exerted an influence out of all proportion to their fundamental worth.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SpecificTitlesofApocryphalWritings\">Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AbdiasApostolicHistoryof\">Abdias, Apostolic History of<\/p>\n<p>Collection of material drawn from canonical and apocryphal writings concerning the lives of the apostles, including Paul. Abdias, an early bishop of Babylon, was supposedly the author of this history that more probably was collated from a variety of sources in the sixth century <span>AD<\/span> in France. This apocryphal “acts,” divided into 10 books, originally circulated in Greek as individual volumes that were collected into one when a Latin version was made. The content is generally regarded as folklore or legend but is of some value where no other source is available.<\/p>\n<p>Abdias, a contemporary of the apostles, may have seen Christ and supposedly traveled extensively with Simon and Jude. There is no historical basis for considering Abdias as the author of the Hebrew text, or for believing that his disciple Eutropius translated it into Greek or that Africanus translated the Greek into Latin—although the preface to the Latin version makes those claims.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AbgarusLettersofChristand\">Abgarus, Letters of Christ and<\/p>\n<p>Apocryphal work comprising two short letters, one supposedly written by the Syrian king Abgar (Abgarus), the other supposedly a reply from Jesus. Eusebius claimed to have found the material in the archives of Abgar at Edessa and translated it from Syrian to Greek together with an account of the exploits of the disciple Thaddaeus.<\/p>\n<p>According to the legend, Abgar, suffering from a severe disease, hears of the miracles of Jesus and sends a messenger with a letter asking Jesus to come heal him. At the same time he offers Jesus sanctuary from the dangerous opposition of the Jews in Jerusalem. In a written reply (later altered to an oral one to comply with the tradition that no writings of Jesus existed), Jesus declines the offer of sanctuary but promises that after his ascension he will comply with Abgar’s request for healing by sending a disciple to him. Thaddaeus, one of the Twelve, is dispatched to Edessa, the king is healed, and the community converts to Christianity. In a slightly different version in the Doctrina Addaei (about <span>AD<\/span> 400), an oral reply is given, and the messenger returns with a portrait of Jesus that is displayed prominently in Abgar’s palace.<\/p>\n<p>The legend is essentially similar to that described in the Greek Acts of Thaddaeus (fifth or sixth century <span>AD<\/span>), except that in the latter Ananias returns with a handkerchief on which is a miraculous imprint of the face of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AbrahamApocalypseof\">Abraham, Apocalypse of<\/p>\n<p>Jewish document existing in old Slavonic texts that go back through Greek to a Hebrew or Aramaic original.<\/p>\n<p>The Apocalypse of Abraham begins with Abraham turning from idolatry. Incorporating old rabbinical traditions of Abraham’s youth, it describes his awakening to the call of God and his awareness that God was one and was holy. An angel named Jahoel, whose functions and powers are lifted from rabbinical lore, takes Abraham to the seventh heaven where he is shown things past and things yet to be. He sees the temptation of Adam and Eve through sexual sin, and the murder of Cain. Azazel, an evil being, plays Satan’s role. These details probably reflect a tradition that Abraham was the author of the first documents of the Bible. The revelation then turns to the future and shows the destruction of the temple, plagues upon the heathen, and the coming of the Messiah. It is probable that the composite document took final form in the last generation of the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>True to his character as revealed in Genesis, Abraham raises the question of evil and why God tolerates the rebellious Azazel. He receives the answer that evil has its origin in the free will of man. This apocalypse shows how faithful Jews struggled to understand the problem of evil during a time of great suffering in Judaism. It also illustrates the curious “doctrine of angels” of that period. Both Gnostic and Christian editing of the text has been noted by some scholars.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AbrahamTestamentof\">Abraham, Testament of<\/p>\n<p>Jewish apocryphal writing describing the death of Abraham. In the testament, when the angel Michael comes to take Abraham’s soul, Abraham refuses to die. Reluctant to insist on the old man’s death, Michael accedes to his request to see all creation before he dies. The angel transports Abraham by chariot into the heavens so that he can observe mankind. Abraham is so shocked at the perfidy of humanity that he curses the sinners, who die immediately. He then observes the judgment of a soul, and although angels take part in the trial he notes that the presiding judge is Abel. The merits and demerits of the soul seem equally balanced, but because of the intervention of Abraham, the judgment is favorable. Abraham then realizes the severity of his cursing of sinners, but the angel informs him that the premature death of those whom he had cursed was the means of atonement for their sins.<\/p>\n<p>After his return to earth, Abraham again refuses to die. Death appears in all his horror and kills 7,000 servants of Abraham (who are subsequently raised to life), but the aged saint still will not die. Finally, Death grasps Abraham’s hand and the angels lift his spirit to the heavens.<\/p>\n<p>The account is found in several Greek manuscripts, the oldest perhaps dating from the 13th century <span>AD<\/span>, as well as in Slavonic, Romanian, Arabic, Ethiopic, and Coptic. The original language was probably Hebrew, from the first century <span>AD<\/span>, with the work possibly translated into Greek by a Christian. The testament also exists in a shorter version in which God comes to lift up the soul of Abraham during a dream. There is no attempt in the work to make a theological statement, but the portrayal of the angel Michael and of Death are typical of Jewish thought of the first century.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ActsApocryphal\">Acts, Apocryphal<\/p>\n<p>Writings purported to be accounts of apostolic achievements not recorded in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ActsofPilate\">Acts of Pilate<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Pilate, Acts of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AdamApocalypseof\">Adam, Apocalypse of<\/p>\n<p>One of the best examples of Gnostic apocalyptic literature. In 1946, a farm worker discovered a number of ancient texts in a cave about 6 miles (10 kilometers) north of the Egyptian city of Nag Hammadi. The discovery included 13 codexes (predecessors of bound books) of Christian and non-Christian origin. The discovery was not immediately disclosed, so it was not until 1958 that a French scholar, Jean Doresse, revealed the existence of the Apocalypse of Adam to the public. The apocalypse is written in Coptic and stands as the last of five works in Codex V.<\/p>\n<p>Although the author’s true identity is unknown, the subtitle spuriously attributes the book to Adam or Seth: “An Apocalypse that Adam revealed to his son Seth in the seven hundredth year.” Seth was often cast in the role of transmitter of truth by the writers of Gnostic literature (for example, the Gospel of the Egyptians, the Paraphrase of Shem).<\/p>\n<p>The earliest existing copy of the Apocalypse of Adam is dated around <span>AD<\/span> 300 to 350, although it may have been written long before. Its frequent Gnostic references, its dependence on Jewish history, and its allusions to baptism have led some scholars to postulate an origin in the Jewish baptist sects of the first and second centuries. Parallels also exist between this work and third-century Manichean (a brand of Gnosticism) literature.<\/p>\n<p>The Apocalypse of Adam is of great importance to students of Christian origins. For many years scholars have debated whether the Gnostic religion was a heretical outgrowth of Christianity or whether it was a movement of independent origins. Some scholars have argued that the Apocalypse of Adam is an example of an early, independent Gnosticism. If this proves to be the case the debate will certainly be simplified.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to its introduction and conclusion, the Apocalypse of Adam may be divided into three parts: Adam’s summary of significant past events, predictions of attempts to eliminate mankind by the evil creator-god, and predictions about the coming of the Enlightener who will show his people the way to the true God.<\/p>\n<p>The apocalypse opens with Adam, supposedly on his deathbed, revealing the future secrets of the Gnostic people to Seth. These have been mystically communicated to him by three angelic beings. Adam bemoans his condition of perpetual slavery to the evil creator-god, brought about by the fall and mankind’s subsequent loss of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span> (knowledge). Typical of Gnostic literature, a sharp distinction is drawn between the evil creator-god who rules the earth and the true God of the universe, knowledge of whom brings authentic life. Adam predicts that the creator-god will jealously attempt to destroy mankind by a flood (the story of Noah) and by fire (the story of Sodom and Gomorrah) and thus keep mankind from knowledge of the true God. These attempts, however, will be foiled by the intervention of angelic beings sent from the God of truth. Finally, the true God will send the Enlightener who will teach <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span> to mankind so that they might know him. The creator-god will try to defeat the Enlightener but will be able to harm only his physical body. With the message of the Enlightener prevailing, mankind will turn from the creator-god and seek the true God through <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gnosticism.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AdamApocryphalBooksof\">Adam, Apocryphal Books of<\/p>\n<p>Account of the life and death of Adam and Eve recorded in Latin, and in a Greek version known as the Apocalypse of Moses. Other minor versions of early Christian origin also exist. Like other apocryphal writings, the work is fanciful and of unknown authorship.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Latin account, after their expulsion from Paradise Adam and Eve are hungry and unable to find food for seven days. In desperation a penitent Eve, assuming responsibility for tasting the forbidden fruit, suggests that Adam kill her. He refuses, and after a search they survive by eating animals’ food. Adam suggests that as a penance they should stand fasting in the river up to their necks for 40 days, he in the Tigris, she in the Jordan. After 18 days Satan comes to Eve in the guise of an angel, tells her that the Lord has accepted her penance, and persuades her to leave the river. Coming to the Tigris where Adam is, Eve realizes that it was Satan who had spoken to her. Satan then explains that the reason for his fall was his refusal to worship man, a lower being.<\/p>\n<p>The archangel Michael is then sent to Adam with seeds so that he can learn to till the land. In a dream Eve sees Cain kill Abel, and in an attempt to prevent the murder by separating the brothers, Cain is made a farmer and Abel a shepherd. Subsequently a third son, Seth, is born. Adam receives a message from God that he is to die because he has obeyed the word of his wife rather than the instructions of God. When Adam is later in pain and close to death, he explains to Seth that Satan had tempted Eve to eat the forbidden fruit and that she in turn had persuaded him to taste it. Seth and Eve journey to the gates of Paradise to plead with God for Adam’s life. On the way Seth is attacked and bitten by a snake. At Paradise, Michael explains to them that Adam must die. Seth observes the burial of Adam and Abel.<\/p>\n<p>Before Eve’s death the following week, she asks Seth to make a record of the lives of his parents on tablets of stone and clay, so that if the Lord shows his anger with the world by water, the clay will be dissolved and the stone remain; if by fire, the stone will be broken up and the clay baked hard. Eve also warns Seth to mourn for six days only and not on the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Greek version is similar to that of the Latin, except that the Greek version includes a description of Adam’s resurrection (added later to the Latin) and a detailed account by Eve of her temptation and fall. The burial of Adam and the initial refusal of the earth to accept the body of the slain Abel are also elaborately described in the Greek account. Both versions are probably derived from Hebrew originals dating from the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AhikarBookof\">Ahikar, Book of<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern folktale from the sixth or seventh century <span>BC<\/span> showing the reward of ingratitude. According to the story, Ahikar, secretary of Sennacherib, king of Assyria, was renowned for his wisdom. Childless even though he had 60 wives, Ahikar adopted his sister’s son, Nadan, and reared him to be his successor in Sennacherib’s court. Ahikar diligently educated his adopted son, who nevertheless turned out to be bad and even forged documents to have his benefactor condemned to death. Ahikar was spared through his friendship with the executioner and was concealed until the wrath of the king cooled. Later, when Sennacherib had occasion to wish for his wisdom, Ahikar was brought on the scene, long-haired, disheveled, and with fingernails like eagles’ claws. Once again in the king’s favor, Ahikar sternly rebuked his unscrupulous nephew. In response to Ahikar’s rebuke, Nadan’s body swelled up and his stomach burst open.<\/p>\n<p>Ahikar’s story has interesting parallels with OT wisdom books and also with some of the parables of Jesus. References to Ahikar occur in the apocryphal book of Tobit, in the Greek philosopher Democritus, in the apocalyptic Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, as well as in the Koran. The story, originally in Aramaic, also survives in Syriac, Arabic, Armenian, Ethiopic, and Greek, though with considerable variations in the versions.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AkhmimFragment\">Akhmim Fragment<\/p>\n<p>Document found in a tomb in Akhmim in Egypt and containing the apocryphal Gospel of Peter. <em>See<\/em> Peter, Preaching of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AllogenesSupreme\">Allogenes Supreme<\/p>\n<p>Gnostic work (“The Most High Stranger”), discovered in 1946 in an urn near Nag Hammadi (Egypt). The Neoplatonist historian Porphyry, as well as later Syriac Christian writings against heresy, mentioned the works of Allogenes (whose name means “foreigner” or “stranger”). Allogenes Supreme, a Gnostic “apocalypse” written in Coptic, contains an account of the creation of the higher world, exalting Barbelo, the celestial mother. The existing copy was made during the fourth century, but the original may date back to the second century.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AndrewActsof\">Andrew, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>Apocryphal work describing purported miracles and the martyrdom in Greece of the apostle Andrew, Peter’s brother. Its theme is the virtue of turning away from materialism and the transitory values of the world to an asceticism associated with dedication of life to God. The earliest fragment available is in the Vatican. The original probably dated from the second century <span>AD<\/span> and was probably long, verbose, and tedious. Feeling that it had merit, Gregory of Tours in the sixth century wrote a concise account of the miracles of Andrew from an original, now lost. The account of the martyrdom of Andrew probably circulated separately.<\/p>\n<p>Among the many miracles Gregory recorded was one concerning Exoos, a noble youth from Thessalonica, who, having heard of Andrew’s preaching and miracles, comes to him at Philippi, is converted, and remains with him. Finding bribery useless and refusing to listen to Andrew, the youth’s parents set fire to the house where the Christians are staying. As the flames roar, Exoos prays that the Lord will extinguish the fire and sprinkles it with water. Thereupon the flames die out. The parents and the crowd, claiming that the youth is now a sorcerer, climb ladders to enter the house and kill the inhabitants, but God blinds the intruders. Although it is night, a light shines out from the house, sight is restored to those who have been blinded, and all except the youth’s parents are converted. The parents die soon afterward, and Exoos remains with Andrew, spending his inheritance on the poor. Returning to Thessalonica, Exoos heals a man who has been paralyzed for 23 years, and subsequently Exoos and Andrew perform further miracles and preach to the people.<\/p>\n<p>In Patrae the maidservant of Maximilla, wife of the proconsul Aegeates, comes to Andrew and implores him to heal her mistress, whose fever is so severe that her husband is standing at her bedside threatening to kill himself with a sword the moment she dies. Telling the proconsul to put up his sword, Andrew takes Maximilla’s hand and the fever leaves her. Ordering food for her, Andrew then refuses Aegeates’ offer of 100 pieces of silver. After performing many miracles in the city, Andrew receives a message from Maximilla to come and heal the slave of the proconsul’s brother, Stratocles. The apostle restores the boy to health, and his master believes.<\/p>\n<p>Maximilla, to the fury of her husband, spends considerable time listening to the preaching of Andrew and is also converted. She then refuses to sleep with her husband and one night even substitutes a servant for herself. Details of subsequent events are found in the account of the martyrdom. Aegeates, in anger, holds Andrew responsible for his wife’s alienation and has him arrested. After preaching from prison, Andrew is taken to be crucified by the seashore. When the Christian Stratocles sees Andrew being manhandled by the soldiers, he fights his way through, and he and Andrew walk together to the place of crucifixion. Aegeates, fearing his brother, orders the soldiers not to interfere. At the seashore the soldiers follow the proconsul’s command that Andrew be tied, not nailed, to the cross so that his death will be lingering and he will be eaten by dogs. After two days he is still speaking to people from the cross, and many come to Aegeates demanding Andrew’s release. Arriving at the scene, the proconsul sees that Andrew is indeed alive, and Aegeates approaches the apostle to release him. Andrew demands that he be allowed to die and meet his Lord. As they watch, Andrew dies and the onlookers weep as Maximilla and Stratocles take down his body from the cross. Maximilla remains apart from her husband and continues as a Christian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AndrewStoryof\">Andrew, Story of<\/p>\n<p>Legendary fragment existing only in the Coptic language. In the legend coming from the late second century <span>AD<\/span>, a woman kills her child in the desert and gives the remains to a dog. She flees when the apostle Andrew and Philemon approach, but the dog tells what happened. Andrew prays and the child, being vomited forth, is restored to life and laughs and cries.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AndrewandMatthiasActsof\">Andrew and Matthias, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>Lengthy document of highly questionable authenticity, probably dating from the late second century <span>AD<\/span>. This book was one of many apocryphal “acts” intended to supplement the NT book of Acts by providing more information about the apostles. The fourth-century church historian Eusebius described this work and others like it as heretical, absurd, and spurious.<\/p>\n<p>In this story, the apostles cast lots to determine where each should go. Matthias (Matthew in some versions) is sent to the country of the man-eaters, where he soon requires rescue from a cannibal feast. The Lord then sends Andrew to save him. Andrew arrives in time to do so, and Matthias is then carried off by a cloud. Now alone, Andrew is arrested and tortured, being dragged through the city that he nearly destroys by calling forth water from a statue. Eventually, impressed by Andrew’s miracles, the people repent and release him. Andrew next draws a plan for a church, has it built, baptizes the people, and gives them the ordinances of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AndrewandPaulActsof\">Andrew and Paul, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>Fragmentary apocryphal story, existing only in Coptic fragments, about the arrival of the apostles Andrew and Paul by sea at a city. In the story, Paul, instructing Andrew to rescue him, visits the underworld. There he meets Judas, who explains that he worshiped Satan after Jesus had pardoned him for the betrayal. Andrew rescues Paul, who returns carrying a piece of wood. Although Andrew is asked to heal a child, some Jews are skeptical and the city gates remain closed to the apostles. Paul strikes the gates with his piece of wood, and the gates are swallowed up into the earth. Astonished at the miracle, 27,000 Jews are converted.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ApostlesEpistleofthe\">Apostles, Epistle of the<\/p>\n<p>Letter purporting to come from the 11 apostles to the churches “of the east and the west, of the north and the south, declaring and imparting to you that which concerns our Lord Jesus Christ.” Some believe that the epistle was written in Asia Minor about <span>AD<\/span> 160; others think that it originated in Egypt. It is probably to be dated near the middle of the second century. In existence are a mutilated Coptic manuscript of the fourth or fifth century, a complete version in Ethiopic, and a fragment in Latin. The epistle was unknown until the discovery in 1895 of the Coptic manuscript.<\/p>\n<p>After an introduction there is a declaration that “our Lord and Redeemer Jesus Christ is God the Son of God who was sent of God the Lord of the whole world.” Then follows a summary of a number of incidents from the Gospels, including a negative statement of the Golden Rule: “Love your enemies, and what you would not that man do to you, that do to no man.” Chapter 24 introduces the subject of the resurrection followed by a series of questions by the disciples with answers by Jesus. A prophecy of the conversion of Paul appears in chapter 31. In chapter 43 the five wise virgins are identified as “Faith and Love and Grace and Peace and Hope”; the names of the foolish are “Knowledge, Understanding (Perception), Obedience, Patience, and Compassion.” The question-and-answer format of a substantial part of the work is reminiscent of the style of some of the texts found in the Gnostic library at Nag Hammadi, especially the Apocryphon of John. However, warnings that Cerinthus and Simon (ch 7) are “enemies of our Lord Jesus Christ” make it clear that this is not a Gnostic document. The epistle contains numerous evidences of orthodox influence, along with clear indications of a departure from apostolic Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ApostlesGospeloftheTwelve\">Apostles, Gospel of the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>One of a large number of heretical “gospels” circulating in the earliest centuries of the Christian church along with the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The Gospel of the Twelve Apostles was first mentioned by name in comments on Luke 1:1 by the Christian theologian Origen (c. <span>AD<\/span> 185–254). Some scholars think it may have been the same as the Gospel of the Ebionites, quoted in a few early Christian writings. Nothing is known directly of the Gospel of the Twelve Apostles.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ArabicGospeloftheInfancy\">Arabic Gospel of the Infancy<\/p>\n<p>One of several “gospels of the infancy” found in the apocryphal NT. This one from about the fifth century contains an account of the birth of Jesus, including the visits of the shepherds and the magi, the flight into Egypt, and miracles performed by Jesus as a boy. Details of the early period of Jesus’ life are given, about which the canonical Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) say nothing. An interesting facet of the miracle stories is the role in many of them of Mary, the mother of Jesus, in contrast to the record of the miracles in the canonical Gospels. The Arabic Gospel may have been written in Syriac and translated into Arabic. Some of its stories are also found in the Koran and other Islamic writings. Study of this apocryphal gospel reveals its sharp contrast with the canonical accounts, but it also indicates how much this and similar writings had to do with the growing veneration of the virgin Mary.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ArabicHistoryofJosephtheCarpenter\">Arabic History of Joseph the Carpenter<\/p>\n<p>Fourth-century <span>AD<\/span> account of the life and death of Joseph—with information supposedly supplied by Jesus. According to this account, Joseph the carpenter becomes a widower after fathering four sons and two daughters (ch 2). He is entrusted with the care of Mary in his 90th year (ch 14). Thus, according to this account, the brothers and sisters of Jesus are Joseph’s children by a previous marriage. Joseph is said to have died at the age of 111 years. The document, which exists in both Arabic and Coptic versions, contains the statement that Mary “must look for the same end of life as other mortals” (ch 18). Hence, it has been dated as earlier than the fifth century, when the idea of the “assumption of Mary into heaven” was being promoted.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AristeasLetterof\">Aristeas, Letter of<\/p>\n<p>Early account of the relationships between Judaism and Hellenism in Egypt during the period when the Hebrew OT was translated into Greek (the Septuagint). The author, Aristeas, who identifies himself as an Alexandrian court attendant under Ptolemy Philadelphus II (ruled 283–247 <span>BC<\/span>), purports to give information about the translation procedures. The most probable date for the Letter of Aristeas (estimates vary from 200 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 50) is the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>As part of his massive library project, King Ptolemy shows interest in the Jewish law. Aristeas uses the occasion to request the emancipation with remuneration of all Jewish slaves in the kingdom and King Ptolemy accedes to the request. The king asks that the high priest in Jerusalem select translators for the project. There follows a lengthy description of gifts sent to Eleazar, the high priest, with special emphasis upon an exquisite table. And then Aristeas describes the temple, the priests, the vestments of the high priest, and the defense system for the temple, followed by a brief description of Palestine and its environs.<\/p>\n<p>In the next section, the high priest talks with Aristeas and the translators before their departure to Alexandria. A summary of his speech includes a careful defense of the law from a philosophical viewpoint. The king gives a lavish banquet for the 72 translators (6 from each tribe) when they arrive in Alexandria. Each translator gives a brilliant answer to the king’s specific questions at the seven successive nights of celebration. The name of each translator and his question and answer are recorded. Then the work is completed on the island of Pharos in 72 days and is praised by the Alexandrian Jews and the king. The translators are dismissed with lavish gifts.<\/p>\n<p>In the epilogue, the author claims to have been an eyewitness to the events and maintains that his report is accurate. This is not believed by modern scholars. Its embellished and legendary quality was recognized in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. Aristeas’s discussion of the translation procedure was obviously a convenient literary frame on which to hang a defense of Judaism to the heathen world. Religious liberalism and loyalty to basic Jewish beliefs were skillfully combined to plead for political toleration for the Jews. Many specifics of the Letter of Aristeas are questionable, but its basic picture of how the Septuagint translation came to be made is credible. <em>See<\/em> the discussion of the Septuagint in Bible, Versions of the (Ancient).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ArmenianGospeloftheInfancy\">Armenian Gospel of the Infancy<\/p>\n<p>Legendary account of the infancy and boyhood of Jesus Christ, one of many apocryphal gospels intended to supplement the four NT Gospels by providing more details about Jesus’ early life. It was probably translated into Armenian from a Syriac original. Nestorian missionaries reportedly brought an “infancy gospel” into Armenia about <span>AD<\/span> 590, but evidently not the Armenian Gospel in its present form.<\/p>\n<p>Sources for the Armenian Gospel included two books containing legendary material about Christ’s infancy, the Protevangelium of James and the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. The Armenian Gospel amplifies the material of these two texts considerably, making many novel additions to the life of Jesus. For example, Joseph searches for a midwife and meets Eve, who has come to witness the fulfillment of the promised Redeemer-seed (Gn 3:15). Later the magi bring the testament Adam gave to Seth. Jesus, accused of causing a child’s death, is cleared when the child is raised from the dead.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AscensionofIsaiah\">Ascension of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Isaiah, Ascension of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AscentsofJames\">Ascents of James<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> James, Ascents of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AsenathPrayerof\">Asenath, Prayer of<\/p>\n<p>Jewish story about the wife of Joseph when he was in Egypt (Gn 41:45) and known by several titles—The Life and Confession of Asenath, The Book of Joseph and Asenath, and variations of the above. It was apparently very popular in the early and medieval Christian church. Latin, Syriac, Slavonic, Rumanian, and Ethiopic versions, in addition to 40 Armenian copies, have been found.<\/p>\n<p>Modern scholars tend to see the source of the novel in the Hellenistic Judaism prevalent in Egypt from 100 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 100. Asenath seems to serve as a model for any proselyte to Judaism. If that understanding is correct, the story gives valuable insight into the less legalistic attitudes of a sector of pre-Christian Judaism. Repentant realization of the hopelessness of one’s sinful condition and casting oneself upon the mercies of God play a large part in the story.<\/p>\n<p>The original was probably written in Greek and is divided into two major parts. Part I deals with Asenath’s pampered life prior to meeting Joseph, his initial rejection of her because of her idolatry, and her consequent repentance in ashes. Asenath calls upon God in prayer, and he sends an angel to her to announce her forgiveness and to say that her name is now written in the Book of Life. Joseph returns and marvels at Asenath’s new beauty, rejoicing at her conversion. With Pharaoh’s blessing they are married the next day.<\/p>\n<p>Part II describes the period when Joseph’s father, Jacob, and his family have come to Egypt. Desiring Asenath, the elder son of Pharaoh tempts Joseph’s brothers Dan and Gad to help him kidnap her. The plan is foiled by Joseph’s other brothers, who then wish to kill Dan and Gad, but Asenath pleads successfully for their lives. Pharaoh leaves the crown to Joseph, who rules 40 years and then returns the reign to Pharaoh’s younger son.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AsherTestamentof\">Asher, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"AssumptionofMoses\">Assumption of Moses<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Moses, Assumption of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BarnabasActsof\">Barnabas, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>Document of one of several distinct cycles of tradition about Barnabas, the apostle Paul’s companion, this one linking him with Cyprus. This work, whose full title is The Journeyings and Martyrdom of Saint Barnabas the Apostle, was probably composed in Cyprus at the end of the fifth or the beginning of the sixth century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The book purports to be a first-person account written by John Mark. He claims to have left the apostles in Perga (cf. Acts 13:13) so he could sail to the West but was prevented. When he tried to rejoin them in Antioch, Paul prohibited him. Consequently, after some dispute, John Mark and Barnabas sailed for Cyprus. After preaching and healing many people, Barnabas encountered his old adversary, Bar-Jesus, who finally stirred up the Jews to capture him. Leading Barnabas out of the city of Salamis, they circled around him and burned him alive. John Mark and some other believers escaped with his ashes and buried them in a cave along with scriptures Barnabas had received from Matthew. John Mark then left for Alexandria to minister there.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BarnabasEpistleof\">Barnabas, Epistle of<\/p>\n<p>This anonymous letter addresses a question commonly asked throughout the early church: What should Christianity’s relationship be to Judaism? Clement of Alexandria quoted from this document frequently and ascribed it to “Barnabas, who himself also preached with the apostle [Paul].” Jerome believed the same. But the writer does not claim to be Barnabas, and the earliest claims of authorship come only from Alexandrian church leaders. The literary and interpretive style is entirely Alexandrian, so it is assumed that the epistle was written in Alexandria.<\/p>\n<p>The author of this epistle unequivocally denies any connection between Judaism and the gospel of Jesus Christ. At the same time, he does not say that the OT opposes the NT; rather, he sees Christianity everywhere in the Law and the Prophets. He holds that all the Judaistic rites and ceremonies are mystical pointers to Christ and that an evil angel has blinded the Jews from understanding this.<\/p>\n<p>The epistle mentions the destruction of Jerusalem, so it was not written before <span>AD<\/span> 70. There was a second devastation of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 132 that ended the revolt of Bar-Kochba. This defeat would have served the author’s purposes so well that he would surely have referred to it if he were writing after the event. Many scholars suggest that the letter was composed around 130, since this was a period of strong Jewish nationalism. This nationalism would have pressured many Jewish Christians to return to Judaism, and so the author of the Epistle of Barnabas wrote to defend Christianity against Judaism.<\/p>\n<p>The Epistle of Barnabas is composed of two parts. The first section (chs 1–17) contains allegorical interpretations of the OT. These highly spiritual and mystical interpretations are intended to oppose Jewish legalism and explain how the OT prophesied of Jesus Christ. The author concedes that righteous people, such as Moses, David, and the prophets, understood the true meaning of Mosaic law, but he contends that the rest of the nation of Israel had misconstrued God’s covenant. Therefore, the Jews lost their claim to the covenant’s blessings, which were transferred to the Christians instead. This allegorical style of interpretation was very popular among Alexandrian church leaders. The NT epistle of Hebrews also makes use of this type of interpretation. The author of the Epistle of Barnabas often quotes from the Septuagint, though the quotes are somewhat loosely recited.<\/p>\n<p>A Latin version of the first section was all that was known of the Epistle of Barnabas until the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus in 1859. This codex contained the first known Greek version of the Epistle of Barnabas, which was appended to the books of the NT along with The Shepherd and the Didache. The Greek version contains a second section that begins, “Now let us pass on to quite a different sort of instruction.” This section contains moral precepts that contrast the way of darkness with the way of light, much of which seems to be transcribed from the “Two Ways” of the Didache. It has little connection with the first section. This has led many scholars to conclude that the second section was added by another writer at some later date.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BarnabasGospelof\">Barnabas, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>Long Italian work actually written in the fourth century by a proselyte to Islam. He probably sought to capitalize on the mysterious mention of such a gospel in the Gelasian Decree, written not later than the sixth century <span>AD<\/span>. To date, no other evidence of an authentic gospel by Barnabas has been uncovered, a fact that has led many scholars to doubt whether it ever existed.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BartholomewActsof\">Bartholomew, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian novel purporting to describe the last days and death of the apostle Bartholomew. The work is also known as The Martyrdom of the Holy and Glorious Apostle Bartholomew. It may date back to the fifth or sixth century <span>AD<\/span> and was evidently well received, for copies exist in Latin, Greek, Armenian, and Ethiopic.<\/p>\n<p>In the Acts, Bartholomew goes to India, takes up residence in a pagan temple, and causes its false oracle to cease. Bartholomew then heals a demoniac, thus drawing the attention of King Polymius. Bartholomew also heals the king’s demon-possessed daughter. Next, he casts the false god out of the temple. After this display of power, many believe the gospel. The king’s brother, however, is enraged and has Bartholomew beaten and beheaded. His rash action is soon punished, for he is strangled to death by a demon. The good King Polymius becomes bishop and serves 20 years.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BartholomewApocalypseof\">Bartholomew, Apocalypse of<\/p>\n<p>Fragmentary Coptic texts that have some similarities to the apocryphal Gospel of Bartholomew. A few scholars have felt that two works were represented in these fragments, a gospel and also an apocalypse. Though this hypothesis has been generally abandoned, references to the debatable Apocalypse of Bartholomew still appear.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bartholomew, Gospel of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BartholomewBookoftheResurrectionofChristby\">Bartholomew, Book of the Resurrection of Christ by<\/p>\n<p>Apocryphal work existing only in Coptic and probably dating from the fifth or sixth century <span>AD<\/span>. Like many similar writings of doubtful authenticity, it claims to supplement the accounts of Jesus found in the biblical Gospels. The book was supposedly addressed by Bartholomew to his son, Thaddaeus, who was warned in it not to let this book “come into the hand of any man who is an unbeliever and a heretic.” The book can hardly be regarded as a narrative; its aim is obviously the glorification of Bartholomew, who sees things that are hidden from others. The text contains many breaks; contradictions abound and a disregard of history is evident. Two different persons bury the body of Jesus: Joseph and Philogenes, father of a boy healed by Jesus. Mary, the mother of Jesus, is confused with Mary Magdalene. In the account of the Last Supper the author goes far beyond biblical statements about the bread and wine: “His Body was on the Table about which they were assembled; and they divided it. They saw the blood of Jesus pouring out as living blood down into the cup.” Imaginative details also embellish the account of the resurrection. Christ, for example, brings Adam back with him from hades. The story of doubting Thomas has been greatly amplified.<\/p>\n<p>The most complete text of the Book of the Resurrection is in the British Museum in London. Several other fragments exist, probably from an earlier version.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BartholomewGospelOf\">Bartholomew, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>One of many apocryphal gospels appearing after the second century under the name of some illustrious figure. The early church was aware not only of the existence of these writings but also of their fictitious character. In the fourth century the church historian Eusebius described them as heretical, spurious, absurd, and impious. Later a Gospel of Bartholomew was mentioned by name, along with several other Gnostic gospels, in the prologue of Jerome’s commentary on Matthew’s Gospel. However, there is no evidence that Jerome had seen such a book or that it actually existed.<\/p>\n<p>A work called Questions of Bartholomew does exist in Greek, Latin, and Slavonic texts—the Greek dating possibly from the fifth or sixth century. Its text has Bartholomew asking Jesus where he went after the Crucifixion and Jesus telling him that he went into hades. Later Bartholomew is pictured as asking Mary to tell how she conceived the incomprehensible or bore him that cannot be carried. Mary warns him that if she began to tell them, fire would come forth from her mouth and consume all the world, but the apostle persists. As she tells the story of the angelic visitation and the Annunciation, fire comes from her mouth. The world is about to come to an end, but Jesus intervenes and places his hand over Mary’s mouth. The apostles also ask to see the bottomless pit and “the things which are in the heavens.” Bartholomew is shown the adversary of men, Beliar, restrained by 660 angels and bound with fiery chains. When Bartholomew treads upon his neck, Beliar explains that he had first been called Satanael and later Satan, describes the creation of the angels, and tells how he fell and how he was able to deceive Eve. Finally, Bartholomew is said to have asked Jesus about the greatest sin. Jesus replies that to say anything evil against a faithful worshiper of God is to sin against the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BaruchApocalypseof\">Baruch, Apocalypse of<\/p>\n<p>Two different pseudepigraphal works.<\/p>\n<p>1. Pseudepigraphal Jewish document of 87 chapters, written in Hebrew and translated into Greek and from Greek into Syriac. Only a few lines of the Hebrew original still exist, quoted in rabbinic writings. The Syriac manuscript dates from the sixth or seventh century AD and is the only complete text. It shows evidence of multiple authorship and dependence on the book of 2 Esdras in the Apocrypha. Similarity of many expressions to those in the NT suggests that the original may have been composed in the last half of the first century or the first half of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>The text is in seven sections of unequal length containing both prose and poetic material. The subjects dealt with are the Messiah and his future kingdom, Israel’s past woes, and the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians. Theological questions such as sin and suffering, free will, the number of people to be saved by the Messiah, and the resurrection of the righteous are not always treated consistently within the text. Some passages paint an optimistic picture of Israel’s future; others are deeply pessimistic. In general the world is a scene of corruption for which no remedy exists. A new and spiritual world is at hand: “Whatever is now is nothing, but that which shall be is very great. For everything that is corruptible shall pass away, and everything that dies shall depart and all the present time, which is defiled with evils.” The alternating optimism and pessimism may reflect the changing fortunes of Judaism in the first and second centuries <span>AD<\/span> or simply the outlook of the different authors. The message of hope is directed to those who keep the law of Moses: “For the righteous justly hope for the end, and without fear depart from this habitation, because they have with Thee a store of works preserved in treasuries.”<\/p>\n<p>The final section of the book is identified as “the epistle which Baruch, the son of Neriah, sent to the nine and a half tribes.” It was sent by being “bound to the neck of the eagle,” probably meaning that it was intended for the Jews scattered outside Palestine (the Diaspora).<\/p>\n<p>Baruch was the prophet Jeremiah’s companion and secretary (Jer 36:4-8). His name was attached to a number of apocryphal and pseudepigraphal writings composed long after his death. The Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch is also called 2 Baruch to distinguish it clearly from the book of Baruch (1 Baruch) in the Apocrypha.<\/p>\n<li>2. Pseudepigraphal document of 17 chapters, also called the Greek Apocalypse of Baruch or 3 Baruch. It is preserved in Greek, Ethiopic, Armenian, and Slavonic manuscripts. It was first published in Venice in 1609 and then in 1868, although its existence was suggested by the early Christian theologian Origen. Like 2 Baruch, this apocalypse seems to be a composite document of the second century <span>AD<\/span> but in contrast is a Christian document intended to warn unconverted Jews and to encourage Christians to be patient in dealing with them.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BasilidesGospelof\">Basilides, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>Polemic commentary on the Gospels by a second-century Gnostic. Basilides’s writings remain only as allusions and fragments in later works by several church fathers. Basilides taught in Alexandria during the reign of the Roman emperor Hadrian (<span>AD<\/span> 117–138). His teacher, Glaucias, claimed to be a firsthand interpreter of the apostle Peter. Basilides asserted that his Gnostic scheme emerged from Peter’s views on the relationship between God and Christ. He described God paradoxically as a nonexistent Being who “generated” three Sonships. Through successive ascents and enlightenments, the gospel of the supreme God (the Gospel of Light) eventually descended upon Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Origen stated that “Basilides dared to write a gospel According to Basilides.” Clement of Alexandria and the writer of a fourth-century fragment, Acta Archelai, thought that Origen referred to an apocryphal gospel, the teaching of which was deduced from Irenaeus’s account. Today, more in line with Hippolytus’s understanding of Basilides, this work is regarded as merely a commentary on the Gospels. Basilides was probably not responsible for the magical rites and libertinism of the Basilidians, a Gnostic sect led by his son Isidore and continuing in Egypt to the end of the century.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BenjaminTestamentof\">Benjamin, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BirthofMary\">Birth of Mary<\/p>\n<p>An early Gnostic writing. “The Gnostics have a book which they call the Birth (or Descent) of Mary, in which are horrible and deadly things.” So said the fourth-century bishop Ephiphanius in describing the Birth of Mary, a work that has not survived. The Birth of Mary claimed to reveal what Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, saw in the temple—namely, the Jewish god in the form of an ass. That Jews and Christians worshiped an ass-god was commonly held by their critics in those days. This blasphemous work should not be confused with the Gospel of the Birth of Mary, a fanciful but relatively harmless account of Mary’s birth, early life, and marriage to Joseph.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BirthofMaryGospelofthe\">Birth of Mary, Gospel of the<\/p>\n<p>Collection of legends purporting to tell Mary’s story from birth to King Herod’s slaughter of the children in Bethlehem. The earliest such manuscript is called Book of the Nativity of Mary or Gospel of James because it claimed to be written by James, half brother of Jesus. It was written by <span>AD<\/span> 150, since Justin, an early Christian writer, named it in his <em>Dialogues<\/em> (165). It was rediscovered for the West by Postel, who translated it from Greek into Latin (<em>Protevangelium Jacobi,<\/em> 1552). Before it was lost, two major Latin revisions of it had been produced: Pseudo-Matthew and the Gospel of the Nativity of Mary, compiled around the sixth and ninth centuries respectively. These revisions amplified the Book of the Nativity of Mary with more fanciful legends and were the basis for the Golden Legends of James of Voragine (1230–1298), which in turn became instrumental in fostering veneration of Mary.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Book of the Nativity of Mary, Mary is born to rich, barren parents (Joachim and Anna) through angelic response to their prayers. They dedicate Mary to the Lord. At six months Mary walks seven steps, so Anna makes her bedroom a sanctuary, allowing nothing unclean to enter, and vows that Mary will walk again only in the temple. At age three Mary is placed in the temple and receives food from an angel. On Mary’s twelfth birthday the high priest asks God what to do and is told to marry her to a widower. Elderly Joseph is chosen when a dove springs from his rod. Months later, Mary “gives birth” to Jesus in Bethlehem’s cave, through a light so bright that none can see; the light gradually withdraws and the Child appears at Mary’s breast. The Book of the Nativity of Mary closes with the magi and Herod’s slaughter of infants. Mary saves Jesus by wrapping him in swaddling clothes and laying him in a manger.<\/p>\n<p>Recently another Greek fragment, this one from the Gospel of Mary, was found (see photo). The fragment is too little to tell us much about the content of this gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"BookoftheCock\">Book of the Cock<\/p>\n<p>Apocryphal story preserved by the church of Ethiopia and still read there on the Thursday before Easter. According to the Book of the Cock, on the night of the Last Supper, Akrosina, wife of Simon the Pharisee, presents Jesus with a nicely prepared cock for dinner. After Judas leaves the room, Jesus touches the cock and it comes to life. He instructs it to follow Judas and to report his dealings. The cock returns and tells about the forthcoming betrayal, mentioning Paul of Tarsus as one of those involved. The disciples weep. Jesus sends the cock to the sky for a thousand years.<\/p>\n<p>A similar story exists as a fragment in Sahidic Coptic. In the Coptic version the resurrection of the cock is a symbol of the resurrection of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"CopticLivesoftheVirgin\">Coptic Lives of the Virgin<\/p>\n<p>Apocryphal works concerning Mary, the mother of Jesus, in the Egyptian language of Coptic. <em>See<\/em> Virgin, Life of the (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"CorinthiansThird\">Corinthians, Third<\/p>\n<p>Apocryphal correspondence purporting to be between the apostle Paul and the Corinthian church. Written during the second century and known as 3 Corinthians, the work consists of three parts: an epistle allegedly from Stephanus of Corinth to Paul concerning two false apostles, Simon and Cleobius; a brief narrative telling of its delivery; and Paul’s reply and refutation of the false doctrine. The sequence of letters was originally part of the Acts of Paul, a longer apocryphal document, but circulated on its own as well—it even found its way into the text of the Armenian Bible. It pretends to explain the reference in 2 Corinthians 2:4 to a letter written in great distress.<\/p>\n<p>According to an early church father, Tertullian <em>(On Baptism),<\/em> the author of 3 Corinthians was a presbyter (church leader) of Asia who forged it out of love for Paul shortly after <span>AD<\/span> 160. That presbyter’s removal from office indicates the stern attitude of the early Christians toward the writing of documents falsely claiming apostolic origin.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"DanTestamentof\">Dan, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"DialogueoftheRedeemer\">Dialogue of the Redeemer<\/p>\n<p>Christian Gnostic document, also called the Dialogue of the Savior. The document was found in the ancient Nag Hammadi Library at the modern city of Nag Hammadi (Upper Egypt) in 1946. The Dialogue is a fictitious account of a conversation between Jesus and some of his disciples in which they discuss questions about the universe, humanity, the end times, and salvation. The manuscript is in poor condition. Its authorship and origin are unknown, though it was possibly written in Egypt during the second or third centuries <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"DiscourseofTheodosius\">Discourse of Theodosius<\/p>\n<p>Coptic Boharic version of the Assumption of the Virgin and a main source for the Coptic form of that legend. <em>See<\/em> Virgin, Assumption of the (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"DoctrinaAddaei\">Doctrina Addaei<\/p>\n<p>Expanded Syriac form of the Epistles of Christ and Abgarus, written about <span>AD<\/span> 400. The Doctrina Addaei tells a story about the contacts between Abgar (Abgarus), king of Edessa, and Jesus Christ. King Abgar, suffering from an unspecified ailment, is said to have sent a messenger to Jesus bearing the king’s written request for healing along with an offer of sanctuary for Jesus in his kingdom. Jesus responds orally, promising to send one of his followers to Abgar after his own ascension to heaven. Abgar’s envoy also takes back a self-portrait of Jesus that becomes the pride of Edessa. Later Addai visits the kingdom, heals Abgar, and establishes Christianity there. <em>See<\/em> Abgarus, Letters of Christ and (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"EbionitesGospelofthe\">Ebionites, Gospel of the<\/p>\n<p>Gospel quoted by one early Christian writer, Epiphanius (fourth century), in a work against heresies. The Gospel of the Ebionites is possibly the same as the apocryphal Gospel of the Hebrews, although some scholars associate it with the Gospel of the Nazarenes. The Ebionites were vegetarians; Epiphanius’s citations stress the vegetarian diets of John the Baptist and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"EgyptiansGospelofthe\">Egyptians, Gospel of the<\/p>\n<p>Two apocryphal works with the same name.<\/p>\n<p>1. Apocryphal second-century <span>AD<\/span> Greek writing, mentioned by the early church writers, Clement and Origen. Used in Egypt, the composition seems to have contained and propagated Gnostic teachings, especially those advocated in Syria by Simon and Menander. According to these Gnostics, marriage, eating meat, and procreation were evil. Clement may have quoted from this writing to refute the beliefs of the Encratites, who broadly agreed with the Syrian Gnostics on those matters. The Gnostics’ depreciation of women was reflected in the quotations Clement used.<\/p>\n<li>2. Composition discovered in 1946 at Chenoboskion (Egypt) in the Nag Hammadi collection of Gnostic writing. The principal title of the work, described in the colophon as “Gospel of the Egyptians” was “Sacred Book of the Great Invisible Spirit.” This work dealt with emanations from “the primal spirit of the cosmos” and perhaps was a product of the Barbelo Gnostic sect.<\/li>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"EldadandMedadBookof\">Eldad and Medad, Book of<\/p>\n<p>Pre-Christian pseudepigraphic composition containing the alleged prophecies of Eldad and Medad, two persons appointed as elders by Moses (Nm 11:26). Since the nature of their prophecy was not specified, it gave rise to a lost work that is quoted in the Shepherd of Hermas as follows: “The Lord is near to them who return to Him, as it is written in Eldad and Medad who prophesied to the people in the wilderness” (Vision II, ch 3). That is the only source of information concerning the lost book.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"EugnostosLetterof\">Eugnostos, Letter of<\/p>\n<p>Gnostic work. Found near the modern city of Nag Hammadi, the Letter of Eugnostos was written in Coptic by a teacher to his disciple. Both author and date of composition are unknown. An early example of non-Christian Gnostic writing, it perhaps served as the basis for a Christian Gnostic composition, “The Wisdom of Jesus Christ.”<\/p>\n<p>The Letter of Eugnostos attempts to prove the existence of an invisible spiritual realm. It also stresses God’s remoteness from humanity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"EveGospelof\">Eve, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>Gnostic and apocalyptic writings, known solely through a citation by Epiphanius, a late fourth-century metropolitan of Cyprus. Epiphanius quoted the Gospel of Eve in a biting refutation of Gnostic and Origenistic teachings. Evidently a cult had formed around Eve as if her name implied revelation because the serpent had spoken to her in the Garden of Eden. Epiphanius’s quotation from the Gospel of Eve roughly translates: “I stood on a high mountain and saw a giant and a feeble man, and I heard a voice like thunder. ‘Come near me and listen,’ and he spoke to me saying, ‘I am you and you are me. Wherever you are, there I am. I am spread through all things, and any place you are able to retire into or take shelter in me; and, taking shelter in me, you take shelter in yourself.’ ”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"EzekielApocryphal\">Ezekiel, Apocryphal<\/p>\n<p>Noncanonical book of Ezekiel mentioned by Josephus, first-century Jewish historian. An apocryphal Ezekiel is cited in five early Christian writings and a recent archaeological discovery. Bishop Epiphanius (fourth century) cited an Ezekiel parable, in proof of the resurrection of the interdependent soul and body, about a blind man and a lame man collaborating to rob an orchard. Clement of Rome, writing to the Corinthians (AD 90?), and Clement of Alexandria in two of his writings (<span>AD<\/span> 200?) have noncanonical Ezekiel quotations. An Ezekiel apocryphon is mentioned in the pseudo-Athanasian canon (purporting to list canonical books of the Bible) and is named in the stichometry (prose written in rhythmic phrases) of Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople (<span>AD<\/span> 806–815). In 1940 Campbell Bonner published Greek papyrus fragments that confirm the existence of an apocryphal Ezekiel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"EzraFourthBookof\">Ezra, Fourth Book of<\/p>\n<p>Alternate name for the apocryphal book 2 Esdras. <em>See<\/em> Esdras, Second Book of.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"GadTestamentof\">Gad, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"GenesisApocryphon\">Genesis Apocryphon<\/p>\n<p>Name given to one of the seven large Dead Sea Scrolls recovered from the first Qumran cave in 1947. With three others it came into the possession of the Syrian archbishop of Jerusalem but could not be unrolled and photographed because it was badly preserved, having not been kept in an earthen jar like the others. Some small pieces were detached, however, and certain words on them indicated that it might be an apocryphal Aramaic work connected with the patriarch Enoch. Further scraps spoke of Lamech, however, thus the scroll was tentatively named for that ancient person.<\/p>\n<p>Eventually it was unrolled and found to be not only damaged but incomplete; the beginning and the end were missing. The inner portion had been best preserved, but considerable damage had been done to the text by the ink it had been written with. The scroll not only dealt with Enoch and Lamech but with other persons mentioned in the book of Genesis. It proved to be an Aramaic form of parts of Genesis dealing with the patriarchs, but it included legends and other materials presented in memoir style, not found in the Hebrew Bible. That style was popular among pious Jews at the beginning of the Christian era, thus its original has been dated to the first century <span>BC<\/span>. The Qumran copy was probably made between 50 <span>BC<\/span> and <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The literary characteristics of the scroll have presented some classification problems. Free expansion and inclusion of nonbiblical material led certain scholars to call the scroll a “targum” or commentary-expansion of the Genesis text. Others have regarded it as a “midrash” or sermonic account of the Hebrew narrative. The scroll contains both elements and is best regarded as an independent recounting of certain Genesis stories, enriched by the inclusion of imaginative material such as a description of the beauty of the patriarch Abraham’s wife Sarah; dreams; and accounts of plagues and journeys.<\/p>\n<p>The Aramaic Apocryphon somewhat antedates the one used in Palestine in the time of Christ. It contains some Hebraisms but is mostly written in good Aramaic, much of which parallels biblical Aramaic. The language of the scroll, however, is later than the period of old Aramaic (tenth to eighth centuries <span>BC<\/span>) or official Aramaic (Assyrian and Persian periods), as the presence of certain grammatical forms indicate. Most scholars have described the language as middle Aramaic and have placed it between the Aramaic of Daniel and later western Aramaic. Those scholars generally assign a second-century <span>BC<\/span> date to Daniel, but that conclusion needs to be modified because the Qumran material shows that no canonical work was composed later than about 350 <span>BC<\/span>. On any evidence, the Aramaic of Daniel is earlier than that of the Apocryphon and seems to fit properly into the period when official Aramaic was the dominant form of the language. The Genesis Apocryphon presents no valid reasons for dating the Aramaic of Daniel or Ezra later than the sixth to fifth centuries <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"GospelofThomas\">Gospel of Thomas<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Thomas, Gospel of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"IsaiahAscensionof\">Isaiah, Ascension of<\/p>\n<p>Pseudepigraphal apocalyptic work widely known to the early Christians; also known as the Martyrdom of Isaiah, the Testament of Hezekiah, and the Vision of Isaiah. It was rediscovered when an Ethiopic version of part of the text was published in 1819. The full Ethiopic version is the only complete version in existence. A partial Latin text published in 1832 had actually been published in Venice over three centuries before. Slavonic and Coptic versions also exist. All may be traced back to two Greek versions of the third, fifth, and sixth centuries.<\/p>\n<p>It is not clear whether the original was a single composition or even whether the authorship was Christian or Jewish with later Christian editing. The final form may date from the latter part of the second century. It was known to Ambrose, Jerome, Origen, Tertullian, and possibly to Justyn Martyr. The contents fall under three heads:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Martyrdom of Isaiah. This material consists of prophetic utterances, including the prophet’s prediction of his own death at the hands of King Manasseh of Judah. The document deals with the dark apostasy of the king, who, indwelt by Satan and following Beliar, leads his people into all manner of sin. Jerusalem, whose fall is prophesied, is called “Sodom” and its princes “Gomorrah.” In the form of a midrash (devotional sermon), this section dwells on Isaiah’s firm rejection of compromise or recantation. Isaiah’s martyrdom by being “sawn in two” is the portion with which the church fathers seem to have been familiar.<\/p>\n<li>2. The Testament of Hezekiah. This section is apocalyptic, a vision Isaiah passes on to his king. It speaks of the descent of “the Beloved,” a title used in this document for the Messiah. The vision covers the Messiah’s incarnation, life, death, resurrection, and ascension, then turns to the early history of the church and the apostasy that precedes the second coming of the Lord. The Antichrist is revealed as Beliar or Satan, who assumes human form and kills his mother (no doubt directed at the Roman emperor Nero, who murdered his mother, Agrippina). The whole section is based on Daniel and the biblical Apocalypse and was also influenced by Gnosticism. The conclusion of the vision (the Beloved’s victory, the two resurrections, and the final judgment) very closely parallels the consummation of all things in the NT book of Revelation.<\/li>\n<li>3. The Vision of Isaiah. This section resembles #2 even linguistically but shows more Gnostic influence: Isaiah is lifted to the dwelling place of the Trinity, the seventh heaven, and shown many mysteries of Christ. Because of this vision Manasseh kills the prophet. Gnostic doctrine, as propagated by Cerinthus at the end of the first century, is evident. Jesus, earthly born, becomes the host of the Christ, who leaves his earthly tenement at the Crucifixion.<\/li>\n<p>Historically, the value of the Ascension of Isaiah is to show the welter of conflicting opinion which, claiming authority and inspiration, besieged the minds of the early Christians.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"IsaiahMartyrdomof\">Isaiah, Martyrdom of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Isaiah, Ascension of (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"IssacharTestamentof\">Issachar, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JamesApocalypseof\">James, Apocalypse of<\/p>\n<p>There were two Gnostic apocalypses of James (designated “first” and “second”). The first, covering over 20 pages of text, purports to be a revelation given by the Lord, some of it before the Crucifixion and some after it, to James, his brother, who was also know as James the righteous. The two documents referred to as the Apocalypse of James are in Codex V of the Nag Hammadi literature discovered in 1945 in Egypt just west of the Nile River opposite the city of Chenoboskion and are distinct from the Apocryphon of James, which is included in NT apocryphal writings. The second apocalypse composed of 20 pages of Coptic text is purportedly a speech delivered by James the Just on the fifth step of the temple and contains many references to or echoes of canonical Scriptures. The work ends with the multitude casting James down from the temple and stoning him in a manner reminiscent of the martyrdom of Stephen.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JamesAscentsof\">James, Ascents of<\/p>\n<p>Lost book mentioned only by Epiphanius (bishop of the Greek island of Salamis) in his fourth-century work <em>Refutation of All the Heresies.<\/em> According to Epiphanius, the Ascents of James was used by the Ebionites, a rigidly ascetic sect of Jewish Christians. The book represented James, Jesus’ brother, as having spoken against the temple and sacrifices. It declared the apostle Paul to be a Greek who went to Jerusalem, sought to marry the high priest’s daughter, and to that end became a proselyte and was circumcised. When he did not win the young woman, he inveighed against the Sabbath, the Law, and circumcision.<\/p>\n<p>In a commentary on Galatians (1865), J. B. Lightfoot suggested that the book’s title referred to James’s ascents up the temple steps, from which he addressed the people. Lightfoot also suggested that James’s death was the grand climax of the ascents. According to a quote from the early Christian writer Hegesippus (as recorded in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em>), James was cast down to his death from the pinnacle of the temple.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JamesProtevangeliumof\">James, Protevangelium of<\/p>\n<p>This is an apocryphal “gospel” that tells of the token marriage and pregnancy of Mary and of Jesus’ birth, childhood, and adolescent years. This apocryphal writing was discovered in the 16th century by Guillaume Postel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JobTestamentof\">Job, Testament of<\/p>\n<p>Apocalyptic literature bearing resemblance to the biblical book of Job. The book was probably written in Greek in the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Since it is devoid of Christian thought, it was likely written by a Jew.<\/p>\n<p>In chapters 1–45, Job is the speaker. He comes to understand that a nearby temple has been desecrated by there having been offered in it sacrifices to Satan. When Job destroys it, Satan threatens him. Job’s friends come to console him but their speeches are greatly abbreviated. Elihu is represented as Satan’s mouthpiece and earns God’s displeasure. But Job sacrifices for all three friends. He remarries and has seven sons and three daughters, who inherit his wealth. Chapters 46–51, in which Job’s brother is the speaker, conclude the narrative.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JohntheBaptistLifeof\">John the Baptist, Life of<\/p>\n<p>A legendary account supposedly written by Serapion dealing with the early life of John the Baptist and especially with the death of his mother, Elizabeth. While Jesus was living with his parents in Egypt, Elizabeth dies on the same day as Herod the Great dies. John, who is but a small boy, does not know how to bury her. The clouds bring Jesus, Mary, and Salome who wash the body. The grave is dug by Michael and Gabriel, who also bring the souls of Zacharias and Simeon. John is then left to grow up in the desert under the care of the angels, while the clouds lift Jesus and Mary to Nazareth where they live.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JohntheEvangelistBookof\">John the Evangelist, Book of<\/p>\n<p>This writing was used most extensively by the Albigenses and was commonly regarded as stemming from the Bogomiles before them. It was written in the form of questions and answers propounded to have come from the apostle John while he leaned upon the breast of Jesus at the Last Supper. This pattern of questions and answers is found in other early Gnostic writings, especially the Gospel of Bartholomew.<\/p>\n<p>The writing contains Gnostic theology. It portrays a world created by Satan and not by God. Christ was not born of Mary but was an angel sent forth to the earth. He “entered in by the ear and came forth by the ear” of Mary. John the Baptist was sent by Satan, and his disciples (the Roman Catholic Church) are not the disciples of Christ. Baptism and apparently the Lord’s Supper are valueless.<\/p>\n<p>The writing is preserved only in Latin and in its present form is not earlier than the 12th century. A convenient English translation may be found in M. R. James, <em>The Apocryphal NT<\/em> (1924).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JosephPrayerof\">Joseph, Prayer of<\/p>\n<p>Jewish apocalyptic work. The Prayer of Joseph won the commendation of Origen, an early church scholar, as a document “not to be despised.” Origen’s quotations provide almost the only surviving information about the work, so that its total content and significance are unclear. An ancient list of OT apocryphal and canonical writings puts the Prayer of Joseph third and mentions its length as 1,100 verses. Origen’s quotations concern mainly Joseph’s father, Jacob. Jacob exists in the form of an angel, bearing Jacob’s given name Israel. He is the speaker in the quoted fragments and foretells the fate of humankind. He describes how he met Uriel on a journey to Mesopotamia and how Uriel wrestled with him, claiming to be the greatest of the angels. The apocalyptic poet had in mind the story of Jacob’s mysterious wrestling at Jabbok (Gn 32:22-29) and passages such as Daniel 10:13. Because Jacob claims to be “the first born of all living beings” and therefore the chief of all angels, Uriel challenges him.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JosephTestamentof\">Joseph, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JosephtheCarpenterHistoryof\">Joseph the Carpenter, History of<\/p>\n<p>Document glorifying Jesus’ earthly father and promoting a cult of Joseph. Words in chapter 18 of the History of Joseph support a fourth-century date for it. There Jesus tells his mother, “You, too, must look for the same end of life as other mortals.” By the fifth century the doctrine of the “Assumption of the Virgin” was widely held.<\/p>\n<p>The document, derived from the Protevangelium of James, was contaminated by both Gnosticism and other religious beliefs of Egypt, the country in which it was written. It is extant in Coptic and Arabic and also in a fourth-century translation of the Coptic text.<\/p>\n<p>The History of Joseph the Carpenter claims to give an account of Joseph’s life and his model death at the age of 111. The story is allegedly told by Jesus to his disciples on the Mt of Olives. Joseph, a carpenter (Mt 13:55), is a widower well advanced in years when he marries Mary, who is only 12. (He had six children by an earlier marriage.) Joseph is buried according to the rites of the Egyptian Osiris cult after Jesus pronounces a eulogy.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JubileesBookof\">Jubilees, Book of<\/p>\n<p>Jubilees is a pseudepigraphal work from the last half of the second century <span>BC<\/span> during the Maccabean period. It is an invaluable source for understanding the environment in the age prior to the launching of the Christian church. Jubilees stands with the Book of Enoch and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs as the most important Hebrew or Aramaic literature of the time. Like these it was translated into Greek and used by the church fathers. Most probably, Jubilees was written in Hebrew since it purported a Mosaic authorship and since its nationalistic Maccabean environment would demand it. Fragments of 10 manuscripts in Hebrew found at Qumran support the thesis that it was originally in that language.<\/p>\n<p>The work is referred to by later Greek writers following Hebrew sources as “Jubilees” and “the little (lesser) Genesis.” It is also entitled “The Apocalypse of Moses” and the “Testament of Moses.” In revised forms it has been called “The Book of Adam’s Daughters” and “The Life of Adam.”<\/p>\n<p>Complete, fifty-chapter manuscripts exist in six Ethiopian texts of which the texts of the fifth and sixth centuries are best. The Latin text is valuable but partial and only a few fragments of the Greek version remain. The Hebrew fragments found at Qumran are of special importance since they are from the period of original writing. The Bibliotheque Nationale has “Ethiopien 51” and “Ethiopien 160.” The British Museum has <em>Kufale,<\/em> or <em>Liber Jubilaeorum,<\/em> and <em>Enoch<\/em><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The author of Jubilees claims a direct revelational source for the teaching that he espouses. God had spoken to Moses in the Pentateuch in the “lesser law” in this “little book of Genesis.” At Sinai God communicated to Moses by the “Angel of the Presence” saying to the angel, “Write for Moses from the beginning of creation until my sanctuary has been built among them for all eternity” (1:27). This is supplementary to the “first law” (6:22).<\/p>\n<p>Following a brief introduction Jubilees follows the text of Genesis and Exodus to 14:31. This midrashic treatment of the Pentateuchal material attempts to show that the patriarchy adhered to the law even prior to Moses. The author’s aim is to strengthen classical Judaism in the face of the serious intrusions of Hellenistic culture among Jewish peoples. In doing this the author does not hesitate in adding and subtracting from Pentateuchal history. The patriarchs are adorned in every way. Anything that showed their weaknesses and sins was removed and legendary content inserted to glorify these fathers. The patriarchs are the fountainheads of culture. Enoch invented writing; Noah, medicine; Abraham, plowing.<\/p>\n<p>Appealing to Leviticus 25:8-12, the work emphasizes the importance of the number seven. History from Adam to Moses is arranged according to cycles of seven. This manner of compartmentalizing history into jubilee periods was revealed to Moses at Sinai and so has divine sanction and in fact is mandated. The philosophy of history that springs from this sees God acting sovereignly and uniquely in Israel in distinction to his relationship with the gentile world. The other nations are ruled by angels but not Israel, which is directly in God’s charge (Jubilees 15:31ff.).<\/p>\n<p>The polemic that Jubilees mounts against the lunar calendar (6:36-38) and its acceptance of the solar calendar is but another facet of the drive for a deep reform that will cleanse Israel. Israel is to be separated to God in every way with no intermingling in marriage or sitting at the table with Gentiles. There is a surprising stringency demanded in Sabbath keeping (50:1-13). The penalty of death is levied against those who travel, buy or sell, draw water, bear burdens, snare creatures, or have marital relations on the Sabbath. These go far beyond the biblical requirements and belong to that milieu that produced the Qumran community and the Essenes.<\/p>\n<p>The apocalyptic declaration of the Angel of Presence contains a clear but limited eschatological truth. Jubilees does contain the expectation of an immediate establishment of the messianic age. The entire emphasis, however, is such that ethical and cultural purposes are preeminent.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JudahTestamentof\">Judah, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"JudasIscariotGospelof\">Judas Iscariot, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>Very old Gnostic writing probably produced by the Cainite sect. As it is not preserved for us today, we know it only through quotations in the writings of early Christians, especially Irenaeus. Thus, it must have been written before the middle of the second century <span>AD<\/span>. It probably contained a body of secret doctrine purportedly revealed by Judas Iscariot, summarizing the truth of superior and perfect knowledge supposedly revealed to this sect of the Gnostics. The gospel sets forth the “mystery of the betrayal,” explaining how Judas through his treachery made the salvation of all mankind possible. This was accomplished by his forestalling the destruction of the truth proclaimed by Christ or by his thwarting the designs of the evil powers, the Archons, who wished to prevent the crucifixion of Christ because they knew it would destroy their evil power.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"LentulusEpistleof\">Lentulus, Epistle of<\/p>\n<p>Lentulus, ostensibly a predecessor of Pontius Pilate, is said to have prepared a report to the Roman Senate known as the Letter (or Epistle) of Lentulus. In it he included a detailed description of Jesus: “tall and handsome, his countenance inspiring reverence along with love and fear, his hair dark, shining, curling, parted in the middle, his face with a delicate rudiness. . . .” The authenticity of the letter is extremely doubtful.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"LeviTestamentof\">Levi, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"LivesofAdamandEve\">Lives of Adam and Eve<\/p>\n<p>A general title given to a noncanonical writing extant in Greek and Latin. The book is Jewish in nature, though there is a Christian flavor that causes most scholars to date the original work to the beginning of the Christian era. The content of the book is an expansion on the biblical story of Adam and Eve.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek version begins with the expulsion from Eden. In a dream, Eve sees the murder of Abel. After Adam had fallen ill Seth and Eve went to obtain oil from the tree of life. Michael the archangel met Seth and told him that Adam would die. Upon his death, he was ultimately taken to the third heaven. Seth witnessed how the angels interred his father and received instructions on how to bury his mother, who died a week after Adam.<\/p>\n<p>The Latin version gives additional information. After the expulsion from the Garden, Eve asked Adam to kill her but instead of that he suggested they both do an act of penitence. Adam went to stand in the Jordan for 40 days and Eve went to stand in the water of the Euphrates for 37 days. While there, she was again tempted by Satan, who was disguised as an angel of light but was eventually exposed by Adam. Satan now explained the reason for his hostility toward them: when the angels were commanded to worship the Lord, he refused to do obeisance to God and was consequently cast out of heaven.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"MatthewMartyrdomof\">Matthew, Martyrdom of<\/p>\n<p>Loosely organized tale of Matthew’s martyrdom that borrows heavily from the “Acts of Andrew and Matthias” and assumes that Matthias was in fact Matthew. The document represents the low literary and theological impulse of the later apocryphal texts.<\/p>\n<p>The story begins when Matthew is commissioned by Jesus to plant a staff in Myrna, the city of man-eaters. Matthew does so, after exorcising the demon Asmodeus from the king’s wife and family. The staff becomes a tree overnight, Matthew preaches to the people, and they “become humanized.” But Asmodeus seeks revenge by directing the king to burn Matthew. The fire consumes golden idols and many soldiers, then turns into a dragon and chases the king, who begs Matthew for help. But Matthew dies.<\/p>\n<p>A somewhat repentant but not yet converted king places the body of Matthew in an iron casket and sinks it secretly in the sea. The next day Matthew appears on the sea in the presence of two shining men and a “beautiful” child. The king is finally converted, baptized, and accepted into the church. Matthew appears to confer on the king his own name and to ordain him a priest and his family, deacons and deaconesses. Then Matthew ascends to heaven with two angels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"MedadBookofEldadand\">Medad, Book of Eldad and<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Eldad and Medad, Book of (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"MosesAssumptionof\">Moses, Assumption of<\/p>\n<p>A Jewish legend that Moses was taken bodily into heaven without dying. Probably written between <span>AD<\/span> 7 and 30, it may be a combination of two earlier works, and appears to borrow heavily from the book of Deuteronomy. The work was likely produced to provide a miraculous ending to Moses’ outstanding earthly life, attributing to him an experience similar to Elijah’s. But this Jewish legend is contrary to the OT account of Moses’ death (Dt 32:48-50; 34:5-7).<\/p>\n<h6>The Lost Assumption of Moses<\/h6>\n<p>Three facts indicate that there once was an apocryphal book that contained the legend of the assumption of Moses: (1) early lists of apocryphal works mention a work by this title; (2) several church fathers refer to it; and (3) a few fragments in Greek have survived.<\/p>\n<p>The following items appeared in the work. God commissioned the archangel Michael to bury Moses’ body. Satan opposed Moses’ burial because he claimed authority over all matter and because Moses was a murderer. Michael countered Satan’s claims and charged him with tempting Eve in Eden. Joshua and Caleb then watched Moses’ assumption occur in a strange way. As they watched, they saw Moses’ dead body buried in the mountain, but they also saw Moses himself in the company of the angels. In effect Moses’ body died, but Moses himself did not.<\/p>\n<p>Though often stated that Jude (v 9) was quoted from the Assumption of Moses, this is impossible to prove, simply because the relevant portions of that work have not survived. The most one can say is that several church fathers, including Clement of Alexandria (d. <span>AD<\/span> 215) and Origen (c. 185–254), suggested that the Assumption of Moses was the source for the account in Jude 1:9. They had both works. We have only Jude, so we cannot check their conclusions. The matter is further complicated because there is another work (see next section) now called the Assumption of Moses. People often suppose that Jude 1:9 is a citation from that book. It is not.<\/p>\n<h6>The Extant Assumption of Moses<\/h6>\n<p>This work, perhaps written during Jesus’ lifetime, purports to be a description of Moses’ predictions to Joshua of the destiny of the nation of Israel. It is similar to other apocryphal, nonhistorical writings that were written under the names of great Jewish leaders.<\/p>\n<p>It was discovered quite by chance in 1861, in the Ambrosian Library in Milan, Italy. The manuscript, dated to the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>, is a very poor copy of a Latin translation, perhaps derived from a Greek translation of a Hebrew original. The beginning and the ending are lost. There are numerous spelling mistakes, and there is no space between words. Not surprisingly, scholars have long disputed the reading, interpretation, and translation even of whole verses.<\/p>\n<p>The opening three lines have not survived, so the original title has been lost. When discovered, the work was assumed to be the long-lost Assumption of Moses, but this identification is now widely doubted. Even though the book is still called by this title, it is far more likely to be either the Testament of Moses (which is also mentioned, along with the Assumption of Moses, in early lists of apocryphal works) or a composite work resulting from the combination of the Testament and the Assumption into one work.<\/p>\n<p>There is only one reference to Moses’ assumption in the book, and it comes in connection with a mention of his death (10:12). Because the ending of the book is also lost, it is impossible to know the contents of the conclusion or to tell whether this one remaining reference to Moses’ assumption is original or whether it has been added by a scribe by mistake or by an editor combining two different works. It is clear, however, that the author of the surviving section believed that Moses expected to die (1:15; 10:12-14) and that Joshua assumed that he would (11:4-8).<\/p>\n<p>The work begins midsentence (three lines are missing) and dates Moses’ following speech to 2,500 years after Creation (1:2-5). Expecting to die, Moses summons Joshua, encourages him, and tells him that God created the world for his people (the Israelites), who will repent before the consummation at the end of the days (1:6-18).<\/p>\n<p>Then Moses foretells Israel’s future. The people will inherit the land (Canaan) and be ruled by local magistrates, chiefs (judges?), and kings (2:1-3). The kingdom will divide, and the people will turn to idolatry (2:4-9). A king from the east (Nebuchadnezzar) will take two tribes into captivity for about 77 years, where they will recall Moses’ warnings (3:1-14; cf. Jer 25:11-12; Dt 28:15-68; 30:15-20). Someone (Daniel) will pray for deliverance (cf. Dn 9:4-19), and God will persuade a king (Cyrus) to send the exiles home (4:1-6; cf. Is 45:1-6; Ezr 1:1-4). Some exiles will return to their appointed place (Jerusalem) and rewall it but be unable to offer [proper] sacrifices (4:7-8; contrast Ezr 3:1-7). Others will remain in exile but will increase in population (4:9). This concludes the OT period and begins the intertestamental period (c. 400 to 1 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The widespread apostasy of the Seleucid period (c. 201–267 <span>BC<\/span>) is described, with special reference to priests and judges (4:1-6). The Maccabees, who gained and maintained political independence from Syria (in 164 <span>BC<\/span>) are not mentioned. Instead, the focus is on the kings (the Hasmoneans) who made themselves high priests (6:1). Next will come an insolent king (Herod the Great, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>), who will rule ruthlessly (6:2-7). Then a powerful king of the West will conquer the people, take some captive, crucify others, and burn part of the temple (6:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>From this point on, the author, having reached his own period, had to guess at the future, so the predictions that he put in Moses’ mouth are general or obscure and often unfulfilled. The next rulers (Sadducees?) would be impious, treacherous, gluttons, deceitful, and worried about ritual uncleanness while living in luxury at the expense of the poor (7:1-10). An unprecedented time of wrath would follow, when a great king would persecute the Jews, torturing, imprisoning, and even crucifying them for practicing circumcision (8:1-5). During this persecution, one man, Taxo, a Levite with seven sons, would remain faithful to God and die rather than adopt Greek customs (8:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>The next section (10:1-10), an apocalyptic poem (ten stanzas, each with three lines), is the only apocalyptic section of the book. The Lord’s kingdom will appear, Satan will be no more, and the chief angel (Michael) will avenge Israel (10:1-2). “The Heavenly One will arise from His royal throne,” and there will be miraculous signs on the earth and in the sky; even the ocean will drain away (10:3-6). The Most High, the Eternal God, will appear and punish the Gentiles, destroying their idols (10:7). But Israel will be happy and exalted, rejoicing at seeing her enemies in Gehenna (hell) and thankfully praising her Creator (10:8-10). With Moses’ mention of his death and some consoling words for Joshua, the composition ends in an incomplete form.<\/p>\n<p>The book must have been written after Herod died and Varus had subdued a rebellion in Judea (4 <span>BC<\/span>) and before the temple was destroyed (<span>AD<\/span> 70). The book predicts that Herod’s sons will not rule as long as Herod himself did (34 years, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>). This prediction may be based on the fact that one son, Archelaus, was deposed after a 10-year reign (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 6). If so, the book was written after <span>AD<\/span> 6. But two other sons (Philip and Antipas) actually ruled longer than their father. For the author not to know this requires that the book must have been written within 34 years of Herod’s death—in other words, before <span>AD<\/span> 30. Therefore, the book was probably written sometime between <span>AD<\/span> 6 and 30. This also means that the book reflects Jewish thinking during Jesus’ lifetime.<\/p>\n<p>The author was evidently a Palestinian Jew, but it is doubtful whether he was a member of any known major sect of the times. He hates Roman rule (8:1–10:10) without advocating revolt, as the Zealots and their predecessors did. His interest in the temple (2:8-9; 5:3; 6:9; 8:5) is not typical of an Essene. He condemns the Sadducean lifestyle (7:3-10). And his use of apocalyptic writing (10:1-10) is thought to have been unusual for a Pharisee.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"NaphtaliTestamentof\">Naphtali, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"NicodemusGospelof\">Nicodemus, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>Alternate title for the apocryphal work Acts of Pilate. <em>See<\/em> Pilate, Acts of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"NoahBookof\">Noah, Book of<\/p>\n<p>Allusion to the writing of Noah is made in the book of Jubilees where it is said “Noah wrote down all things in a book as we instructed him concerning every kind of medicine. Thus the evil spirits were precluded from (hurting) the sons of Noah” (10:13; see also 21:10). The book of Noah borrows heavily from the book of Enoch (see chs 6–11, 54–55, 60, 65–69, 106–110). The other sections relate to the Noachic flood and subjects about which Noah could be presumed to have knowledge. Unfortunately no separate manuscript of the book of Noah is known to be extant.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"OdesofSolomon\">Odes of Solomon<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Solomon, Psalms of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PatriarchsTestamentsoftheTwelve\">Patriarchs, Testaments of the Twelve<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PaulActsof\">Paul, Acts of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Paul and Thecla, Acts of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PaulActsofAndrewand\">Paul, Acts of Andrew and<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Andrew and Paul, Acts of (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PaulandTheclaActsof\">Paul and Thecla, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of Paul and Thecla is one section of an apocryphal work known as the Acts of Paul. It was apparently written in the latter half of the second century <span>AD<\/span> by a church elder who lived in Asia. According to Tertullian (<em>On Baptism<\/em> 17.19-21), the motive for the writing was “love of Paul,” but the presbyter was removed from office for producing this document. It is not clear whether the reason for his deposition was that he made a false claim to apostolic authorship, or whether it was that the viewpoints expressed in the document were considered heretical.<\/p>\n<p>The story reads like a folktale. Paul arrives in Iconium after fleeing from Antioch. He is met by Onesiphorus, who welcomes Paul into his home. A group of people gather there to hear Paul’s message. Beside the window of a neighboring house, Thecla is seated. She cannot see Paul, but she listens intently to his message. Her mother, Thecleia, exclaims, “My daughter, like a spider, is bound by his words to the window, seized by a new craving and a terrible passion.” Paul is teaching that in order to “see God,” a person must live a life of abstinence from sexual activity.<\/p>\n<p>Thecla is engaged to be married, but she is so impressed with Paul’s teaching that she determines she will break her engagement to Thamyris. Thamyris, in distress, appeals to the governor of the city, who arrests and imprisons Paul. Thecla bribes the jailer with bracelets and a silver mirror and enters Paul’s cell. Again she is transfixed by his teaching. At the trial, Thecla is adamant in her refusal to marry Thamyris. Paul is banned from the city; Thecla is condemned to be burned to death. Miraculously her life is spared, and she is reunited with Paul and travels with him to Antioch.<\/p>\n<p>In Antioch, Thecla rebuffs the advances of a nobleman, Alexander, and for a second time is condemned to death. But the wild beasts who are to devour her in the public arena instead lick her feet and protect her. When she throws herself into a water cistern to effect her baptism, she is again spared death—a lightning flash kills the fish lurking in the water, and they float lifeless to the surface. Queen Tryphaena, who has befriended Thecla, faints with shock as repeated attempts are made to take Thecla’s life. Seeing this, Alexander finally begs the governor to set Thecla free.<\/p>\n<p>Free once more, Thecla seeks Paul. She disguises herself as a man by putting on male attire. Arriving in Myra, she finds Paul and announces to him that she is returning to Iconium. Paul commands her to “teach the word of God.” After teaching for a while in Iconium, Thecla travels on to Seleucia.<\/p>\n<p>The remainder of Thecla’s life is not well documented. Some manuscripts record that Thecla, being afraid of the people of Seleucia, withdrew to a mountain and resided in a cave. There she lived an ascetic life, taught certain women who came to her, and carried out a ministry of healing. Later she departed to Rome, seeking Paul. Paul, however, was already dead. When Thecla herself died, at 90 years of age, she was buried not far from the tomb of her beloved master.<\/p>\n<p>Although this work is considered apocryphal and is excluded from the NT canon, there are some early writers who held it in high regard. The Acts of Paul, of which this document forms a part, is mentioned by Origen and by Hippolytus with respect. Eusebius was of the opinion that the document was spurious, but he distinguished it from inferior heretical works. There are two instances where details of information have found their way from the Acts of Paul into early manuscripts of canonical books (2 Tm 3:11; 4:19). It is probable that the viewpoints indicated in this document reflected popular religious traditions widely held in the second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Tertullian, however, argues that the document is quite out of harmony with Paul’s attitudes as expressed in the canonical material. In particular, he objects to the role assumed by a woman in the Acts of Paul and Thecla. Paul, Tertullian says, would never have permitted a woman to teach and to baptize (<em>On Baptism<\/em> 17.21-23). The Acts of Paul and Thecla does differ from the Pauline stance, but not in the way indicated by Tertullian. The document depicts Paul as a proponent of the encratite viewpoint, teaching that celibacy is necessary for salvation. The canonical Paul taught that salvation is attained through faith alone, and that celibacy is a matter of special calling and certainly not the norm for every Christian (1 Cor 7:1-7). The Acts of Paul and Thecla suggests that a woman must assume male attire and must abstain from marriage if she is to exercise a leadership role. The canonical Paul instructed that a woman in a leadership position should dress as a woman (1 Cor 11:4-6), and he affirmed the ministerial function of married women (Rom 16:3). The Acts of Paul and Thecla emulates a woman whose motivating power was personal devotion to the apostle. The canonical writings suggest that Paul strongly discouraged such a show of personal allegiance to himself (1 Cor 1:12-17). Christ alone was to be the motivating influence in Christian service.<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of Paul and Thecla provides us with a unique description of the physical appearance of Paul: “a man small of stature, with a bald head and crooked legs, in good state of body, with eyebrows meeting and nose somewhat hooked, full of friendliness; for now he appeared like a man, and now he had the face of an angel.” This description is probably not reliable in any historical sense; more likely it pictures a typical Jew of the period. But because there is no other description preserved in early documents, this one has formed the basis for the many portraits of Paul that have come down through the centuries.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PaulApocalypseof\">Paul, Apocalypse of<\/p>\n<p>This document, which originated in the late fourth century <span>AD<\/span>, pretends to be a written account of some of the experiences that the apostle Paul had when he was caught up to the third heaven, or paradise, according to 2 Corinthians 12:2-4. The fact that Paul did not describe what he saw or heard during that revelatory vision excited the imagination of some unknown fourth-century Christian. Since the author describes with relish the tortures in hell experienced by a presbyter, bishop, and deacon (chs 34–36) and elsewhere approves of the devotion and piety of monks and nuns (chs 7–9) and of those who are virgins or chaste (ch 22), it is safe to conclude that he was a monk who disapproved of the insincere and hypocritical religiosity of his contemporaries, both laymen and clergy.<\/p>\n<p>This book, originally written in Greek, survives in relatively complete form in Latin. A partial indication of the great popularity of this piece of religious fiction is the fact that it was translated into Ethiopic, Coptic, and Syriac as well as Latin.<\/p>\n<p>The book is loosely structured in seven sections. The work begins with a short introductory section that attempts to explain why the book was unknown from the first to the fourth century (chs 1–2): during the consulate of (emperor) Theodosius Augustus the Younger and Cynegius (the document can thus be dated to <span>AD<\/span> 388), a respectable but nameless person received a revelation through an angel. The man happened to be living in Tarsus in a house once occupied by St Paul himself. The angel told the man to break up the foundations and publish whatever he found. After being pummeled by the angel for disobedience, he finally broke the foundations only to discover a marble box that he immediately delivered to the emperor. The emperor opened the box and found the original version of the Apocalypse of Paul (which he copies) and a pair of shoes used by Paul on his missionary journeys. The substance of the mysterious document then follows.<\/p>\n<p>In chapters 3–6, Paul is said to have received a message from God announcing how all creation is subject to God with the exception of man himself. Chapters 7–10 relate how the guardian angels of each man and woman report every morning and evening to God concerning the deeds of those in their charge. Some are very good, while others are exceedingly wicked. In chapters 11–18, Paul is taken up in the Holy Spirit to the third heaven and asks to see the souls of the righteous and sinners as they leave the world. The angel accompanying Paul shows him a righteous man leaving the world, an ungodly man, and the soul of one who thought himself righteous but in fact was not.<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 19–30 describe Paul being lifted up to the third heaven (cf. 2 Cor 12:2-4), where he saw a golden gate flanked by golden pillars upon which were mounted golden tablets containing the names of the righteous. Upon entering paradise he was greeted by Enoch and Elijah and shown things that he could not reveal to others (ch 21; cf. 2 Cor 12:4). From there he was taken to the second heaven and then to the firmament encircled by Ocean (ch 21). There he saw the milk white waters of Lake Acherusia where the city of Christ was located. He was brought to the city in a golden boat while 3,000 angels sang a hymn. At the river of honey he met Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and other prophets (ch 25); at the river of milk he saw the infants slain by Herod (ch 26); at the river of wine he met Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Lot, and Job (ch 27); at the river of oil he met those completely dedicated to God (ch 28). At the center of the city, by a great altar, David sang the hallelujah to God.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s tour of hell is described in chapters 31–44; it is a place of sorrow and distress in which flows a river boiling with fire. In the river, some of the damned were immersed to the knees, others to the navel or lips, depending on the severity of their sins (ch 31). Chapters 34–36 describe the tortures of a presbyter, bishop, and deacon. Throughout this section the most ghastly tortures imaginable are described in detail with great relish. Finally, in chapter 44, Christ decrees that for Paul’s sake there will be no torture on Sundays henceforth.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s angelic travel guide then escorts him to paradise (chs 45–51), where the righteous of all ages are anxious to meet him. He meets the Virgin Mary (ch 46), Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as well as the 12 sons of Jacob (ch 47), Moses, who weeps for the unconverted Jews (ch 48), Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, each of whom describes his martyrdom, Lot and Job (ch 49), Noah (ch 50), Elijah, Elisha, Zechariah and his son, John the Baptist, and Adam (ch 51). The document either ended here or, in alternate versions, with Paul’s miraculous trip to the Mt of Olives where he and the other disciples received the divine commission.<\/p>\n<p>The document is filled with contradictions and inconsistencies and many of the translated versions do not agree with each other in all details. The chief importance of the document is in terms of its glimpses into the thinking of late fourth-century Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PaulPassionof\">Paul, Passion of<\/p>\n<p>A revised Latin version of the apocryphal Martyrdom of Paul, which was part of a larger body of texts called the Acts of Paul. The original Martyrdom is the story of Paul’s resuscitation of Patroclus, Nero’s cupbearer, who had fallen from a window and died during one of Paul’s sermons. Patroclus confesses his new loyalty to Christ before the stunned Nero, who moves quickly to round up all such “soldiers of the great king (Christ).” Paul is included in the purge. The Passion elaborates on the story to include a passage about Seneca’s admiration for Paul and his writings, portions of which Seneca allegedly read to Nero. Also, Paul on the way to his death borrows a kerchief from Plautilla, promising to return it. When the returning soldiers mock her, she shows them the bloodied kerchief.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PaulPassionofPeterand\">Paul, Passion of Peter and<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Peter and Paul, Passion of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PearlHymnofthe\">Pearl, Hymn of the<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Thomas, Acts of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PeterandPaulPassionof\">Peter and Paul, Passion of<\/p>\n<p>This writing comes to us in two forms, both of which are considered to have been written by Marcellus and date from the fifth century. The first form is essentially like the Acts of Peter and Paul. It lays emphasis upon Paul’s journey to Rome. The second gives more attention to the men’s residence in Rome with emphasis upon their stay in the home of a relative of Pontius Pilate. Both emphasize the close relationship between Peter and Paul and their continued and successful opposition to Simon Magus, who claims to be the Christ. Their death sentences are included in the writings but with only a brief account of their martyrdoms.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PeterGospelof\">Peter, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Akhmim Fragment (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PeterPreachingof\">Peter, Preaching of<\/p>\n<p>This document, which has survived only in fragments, appears to have been written early in the second century <span>AD<\/span> in Egypt. While the title does not explicitly claim Petrine authorship, it was understood by Clement of Alexandria (late second century <span>AD<\/span>) to have been an authentic composition by the apostle Peter (<em>Stromata<\/em> 2.15.68). The majority of the fragments of the Preaching of Peter are preserved in the form of brief quotations in the writings of Clement of Alexandria.<\/p>\n<p>The fourth-century church historian Eusebius of Caesarea observed that the Preaching of Peter had not been accepted by any ancient authorities (<em>Historia Ecclesiastica<\/em> 3.3.1-4), though he was probably not aware of its acceptance by Clement. Even though only fragments of the document have survived, they are important in that they reveal a transitional stage in the history of early Christian literature. During the first century, Christian literature, including all of the NT, was written for the consumption of other Christians. During the second century, Christian writers began to feel the need to defend their faith against the criticisms of their pagan and Jewish opponents. A new kind of Christian literature, the apology (meaning “defense”), began to appear in the early second century with the writings of the earliest Christian apologists Quadratus and Aristides. The Preaching of Peter represents a transition from the kind of apologetic writing found in the Acts of the Apostles, the sermons that that book contains, and the writings of the early apologists.<\/p>\n<p>Since Clement quotes randomly from the Preaching of Peter, it is not possible to determine the order in which any of the quotations appeared in the original composition. Some of the major emphases of the document will appear from the following summaries of the quotations of Clement. Peter, according to Clement, called the Lord both “Law and Word” in the “Preaching” (<em>Stromata<\/em> 1.29.182; 2.15.68). Mankind must recognize that <em>one<\/em> God created the beginning of all things and has the power to bring all things to an end (<em>Stromata<\/em> 6.5.39-41). The pagans, whom the author of the Preaching of Peter opposed, held that the universe was uncreated and eternal. God, the author contends, is invisible, incomprehensible, needs nothing, is inconceivable, everlasting, imperishable, and uncreated. This God must not be worshiped in the manner of the Greeks, for they have foolishly fashioned images of ordinary materials and worship them as gods. Further, they take animals that should be used for food and sacrifice them to these idols. The worship of the Jews should not be emulated either, for they revere angels, archangels, months, and the moon. If any of the nation of Israel should repent, they will find forgiveness (<em>Stromata<\/em> 6.5.43). In one place the Preaching of Peter narrates how the Lord sent disciples to preach the gospel throughout the world after the resurrection (<em>Stromata<\/em> 6.6.48), though the precise connection between this narrative and the preceding apologetic statements is not clear. It may be that the document began with a special version of the great commission. Elsewhere the document states that the OT prophets speak of Christ, sometimes in parables and enigmas, yet at other times very clearly and directly (<em>Stromata<\/em> 6.15.128). In fact, the major events of the life of Christ, his coming, torture, crucifixion, death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven were predicted in detail by the prophets.<\/p>\n<p>The importance of the surviving fragments of the Preaching of Peter lies in the way in which they reveal how early second-century Christianity turned from a defensive to an offensive position in its proclamation of the gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PeterSlavonicActsof\">Peter, Slavonic Acts of<\/p>\n<p>An account of the later travels of Peter and his subsequent death in Rome preserved for us only in the Slavonic language. According to this account, a child (Jesus) comes to Peter and bids him to go to Rome. The angel Michael is captain of the ship taking them to Rome. After their arrival in Rome, Peter tells the child to catch some fish, whereupon he catches 12,000 in one hour. Then the child is sold to a Roman noble, Aravistus, for 50 pieces of gold. The child silences his teachers. After a vision of angels, the entire household is baptized. Nero arrests Peter, whereupon the child rebukes him. Many dead are raised, but the child sends them back to their graves to await the resurrection by Michael. Peter is crucified head downward. When the child reveals he is Jesus, the nails fall from Peter’s body, he prays for the forgiveness of his executioners, and then he dies. Such apocryphal versions of the acts of early church leaders are characteristically filled with fanciful acts of the apostles and their contact with the Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PetersLettertoPhilip\">Peter’s Letter to Philip<\/p>\n<p>This letter is part of the Christian Gnostic material discovered in 1947 at Nag Hammadi. It probably dates from the late second or early third century. The letter takes its name from a segment at the beginning of the tractate in which Peter claims to have sent the material to Philip. The letter is written in a dialogue form common in Gnostic literature. The body of the writing consists of a series of questions that are asked by the apostles of the risen Lord and the answers given by him. The questions provide a basis for the exposition of Gnostic philosophy about the structure of the world revealed by the Divine Light. That Light is the Christ, who is the heavenly Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PilateActsof\">Pilate, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>This document is an apocryphal passion gospel that reached its present form by the middle of the fourth century <span>AD<\/span>. The first Christian writer to refer to the Acts of Pilate was Epiphanius, an ecclesiastical heresy hunter, who wrote a lengthy denunciation of various heresies in <span>AD<\/span> 375, in which he definitely mentioned the Acts of Pilate (<em>Heresies<\/em> 50.1). Much earlier, Justin Martyr had referred to Pilate’s report to Tiberius regarding the trial of Jesus (<em>I Apology<\/em> 35; 48), but he does not seem to be referring to the Acts of Pilate. Toward the end of the second century <span>AD<\/span>, a generation after Justin, Tertullian referred to an account sent from Pilate to the emperor Tiberius, yet this cannot be the Acts of Pilate, since Jesus supposedly performed many miracles before the procurator. Although it is not improbable that an earlier version of the Acts of Pilate antedated the fourth century, the present version must be dated to the middle of that century. The original language of the Acts of Pilate was Greek, and translations of it were made into Latin, Coptic, and Armenian. Eusebius, the fourth-century church historian and bishop of Caesarea, condemns what he regarded as a blasphemous account of Pilate, apparently a pagan document calculated to defame Christ (<em>Historia Ecclesiastica,<\/em> 1.9.3; 9.5.1). The Christian Acts of Pilate was probably composed to counter the pagan document.<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of Pilate is a composite document consisting of two main parts. The first part (chs 1–16) purports to be a translation from Hebrew to Greek of an account written by Nicodemus about the events surrounding the passion of Jesus. The second part (chs 17–27), also called “Christ’s Descent into Hell,” vividly describes Christ’s descent into hades to liberate the righteous dead (an imaginative expansion of 1 Pt 3:19 which was itself transformed in the Apostles’ Creed into the phrase “he descended into hell”). After the 14th century <span>AD<\/span>, the whole composition was commonly designated as the Gospel of Nicodemus because of the prominent place that character played in the document.<\/p>\n<p>In the prologue to the Acts of Pilate, a Roman soldier named Ananias claims to have found the Acts of Pilate in Hebrew and to have translated it into Greek in the 18th year of the reign of Emperor Flavius Theodosius (<span>AD<\/span> 425). A quotation of the entire document follows: In the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar (<span>AD<\/span> 29), Nicodemus wrote an account of the events that surrounded the passion, death, and resurrection of Jesus. The Jewish high priests accused Jesus of various religious crimes to Pilate and asked that he be tried. Though unwilling, Pilate sent for Jesus anyway, though in a most gracious manner. When Jesus arrived, the Roman standards bowed to him of their own accords (ch 1). In chapter 2 the Jewish charges against Jesus included: (1) that he was born of fornication, (2) that his birth meant the death of the children of Bethlehem, and (3) that Joseph and Mary fled to Egypt because they counted for nothing among the people of Israel. The charge of fornication was immediately refuted by 12 pious Jews who had witnessed the betrothal of Mary and Joseph. An interview between Pilate and Jesus (modeled after Jn 18:33-38) follows in chapter 3. The Jews charge Jesus with blaspheming God, and Pilate reluctantly turns Jesus over to them (ch 4). Nicodemus then stands up in the Jewish council and urges them to let Jesus go, for if he is not of God his movement will fail (cf. Acts 5:38-39), but the Jews oppose him (ch 5). Then three Jews healed by Jesus testify in his behalf (ch 6), followed by Bernice, the woman healed of the issue of blood (ch 7). The crowd proclaims Jesus a prophet (ch 8). When Pilate offers to release a prisoner, the Jews ask for Barabbas, and Pilate then washes his hands of the matter and has Jesus scourged and crucified with the two criminals, Dysmas and Gestas (ch 9). Jesus is mocked by the crowds, while one criminal (Gestas) is rebuked by the other (ch 10). Jesus’ death is accompanied by a darkening of the sun, which the Jews regard as a normal eclipse (ch 11). Joseph of Arimathea is then seized by the Jews and imprisoned; when they come to execute him he has vanished (ch 12). The guards report the appearance of the angel at the tomb, but are bribed by the Jews to keep silence (ch 12). Three Jews then come from Galilee: Phineas, a priest; Adas, a teacher; and Angaeus, a Levite. They report that they have witnessed the great commission and ascension of Jesus on Mt Malich (ch 14). Nicodemus suggests that the surrounding mountains be checked to see if some spirit has not taken Jesus up only to dash him on the rocks; the Jews find nothing except Joseph of Arimathea in his hometown (ch 15). Joseph is summoned to testify before the council and reveals how the risen Jesus had appeared to him when he was imprisoned and set him free (ch 15). The council decides, after hearing other witnesses, that if Jesus is still remembered after 50 years, the stories must be true (ch 16).<\/p>\n<p>The second document begins with an account of Joseph speaking to the council. Two brothers, he claims, had been raised at the same time as Jesus. The council summons them to give their stories (ch 17). While in hades, the brothers claimed, a great light appeared and Abraham and Isaiah became overjoyed (ch 18). Satan thought that Jesus could be restrained in hades (ch 20); but when the King of Glory arrived, the gates were broken down. Satan was handed over to the angels to be bound (ch 22) and was rebuked by hades for causing the ruin of his kingdom (ch 23). The King of Glory (Christ) then led Adam and the rest of the righteous dead out of hades (ch 24) and to paradise (ch 25), where even the repentant criminal was seen (ch 26). The two brothers claim that they have been sent by the angel Michael to preach the resurrection of Jesus to all mankind.<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of Pilate is a pastiche (collection) of quotations and allusions from the four canonical Gospels, mingled with imaginative and even fantastic additions. It is basically an apologetic document that attempts to defend the truth of the resurrection of Jesus against the counterclaims of pagan and Jewish adversaries. Unfortunately, it has an anti-Semitic tone that was to characterize Christian dramatizations of the events of Passion Week from the fourth century through the end of the Middle Ages.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PistisSophia\">Pistis Sophia<\/p>\n<p>A fourth-century Coptic manuscript (Codex Askewanus) that represents one of the chief Gnostic works extant today. The work, containing four chapters, derives its name from the heroine, Sophia, though only the first half of the work refers to her. This portion relates how Jesus, during the first 11 years after his resurrection, returned to teach his disciples the highest mystery of all: the Treasury of the Light. Jesus returned to the Mt of Olives where he is caught up through the aeons and on his journey comes to the thirteenth aeon where he finds Sophia. She is in sorrow because she has caught a glimpse of the Treasury of the Light but is deceived by Authades (the self-willed), who flashes a false brightness before her, causing her to fall into the hands of the powers of matter. She maintains her hope and faith, however, and after 12 prayers is delivered from Authades and chaos by Jesus who reinstates her at the lower limit of the thirteenth aeon.<\/p>\n<p>The work is in dialogue form—with Jesus answering questions asked by his disciples. The theme is thoroughly Gnostic in its view of salvation that comes by a hidden doctrine that brings illumination.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ProtevangeliumofJames\">Protevangelium of James<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> James, Protevangelium of (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"PsalmsofSolomon\">Psalms of Solomon<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Solomon, Psalms of (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ResurrectionofChristbyBartholomewBookofthe\">Resurrection of Christ by Bartholomew, Book of the<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Bartholomew, Book of the Resurrection of Christ by (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ReubenTestamentof\">Reuben, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"SibyllineOracles\">Sibylline Oracles<\/p>\n<p>A pseudepigraphal writing comprising originally 15 books, 12 of which are extant in late Greek manuscripts. The word <em>sibyl<\/em> is of Greek origin. It claimed to be an oracle of the gods and generally contained a message of a coming catastrophic event. Some Jews adopted and used this mode of writing for propagation purposes.<\/p>\n<p>The sibyls came from the beginning of the Maccabean period (165 <span>BC<\/span>) and cover a period up to shortly after the destruction of the second temple (<span>AD<\/span> 76). The authors, presumably writing in Alexandria, Egypt, stressed the unity and sovereignty of God. God controlled all events, whereas pagan deities were useless, unable to do anything. “But God is one, most exalted of all, who has made the heaven, the sun, the stars and the moon. . . . He has constituted man as the Divinely appointed ruler of all. You men . . . be ashamed of making gods” (book 2). God controls the history of the nations. The sibyls outline the history of 10 generations from the Assyrian kingdom to the destruction of the second temple and the great earthquake (book 4.47ff.). The third book also contains a section on the devastation and troubles to be experienced before the great judgment. It includes two messianic passages wherein the Messiah introduces an era of peace and prosperity for the faithful: “He will raise up his kingdom for all ages over men. . . . For nothing but peace shall come upon the land of the good” (lines 767, 780). The eternal state is to be reserved for the faithful who will be raised from the dead in a bodily form: “But all who are godly shall live again on earth, when God gives breath and life and grace to them the godly” (book 4.187-190), whereas the ungodly are to be thrown into hell, “And all who have sinned with deeds of impiety a heap of earth shall cover again, and murky Tartarus and the black recesses of hell” (lines 183-186).<\/p>\n<p>The express purpose of the authors of the sibyls was to demonstrate the reasonableness of the Jewish faith by casting their message in the form of the sibyl, introduced by the Greeks and appreciated by the Romans. In their emphasis on the God of Israel and their opposition to paganism, they nevertheless stand in the stream of the apocalyptic, the unveiling of God’s secrets of past and future. The sibyl as divine oracle was, thus, used as a literary form in order to convey a message to the non-Jewish world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"SilvanusTeachingsof\">Silvanus, Teachings of<\/p>\n<p>Literary work of the Gnostics, attributed to Silvanus, the companion of Peter and Paul. It was discovered at Chenoboskion in Upper Egypt in 1946.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"SimeonTestamentof\">Simeon, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"SlavonicActsofPeter\">Slavonic Acts of Peter<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Peter, Slavonic Acts of (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"SolomonPsalmsof\">Solomon, Psalms of<\/p>\n<p>The Psalms of Solomon are a collection of 18 songs attributed to Solomon. They are considered pseudepigrapha. The psalms were probably written by one author, who lived during the middle of the first century <span>BC<\/span> and wrote in Hebrew. The theological perspective of the author is Pharisaic in its views of the law, judgment, and the future of Israel. The Psalms of Solomon are derived from the canonical book of Psalms in their form and phraseology. One of the similarities in the form and phraseology is the emphasis on the antithesis between the righteous and the wicked. The wicked are the Gentiles who defile the holy things of the Lord (2:3) and apostate Jews who have fallen into sin (3:11, 13).<\/p>\n<p>The character of the sinner is that of the fool, as opposed to the wise man (cf. Wisdom Literature). The fool has no concern for the Lord (4:1); his speech and deeds betray his unrighteousness (4:2ff.). He is known by his lies, judgment of others, false oaths, his immorality, lawlessness, and selfish ambitions at the cost of others (cf. 12). The righteous are the wise, who fear the Lord (4:26). He is not dismayed by bad dreams or perilous times (6:4-5). He is provoked with zeal for the Lord’s righteousness, as he witnesses the desecration of the temple and the law (8:28). The Lord’s love of him is expressed in discipline, and he responds to the Lord’s rebuke with repentance for his sins. The author compares the righteous to the tree of life in Paradise. They are stable and will not be uprooted (14:2ff.). The wicked, on the other hand, will not be remembered in this life, and God will deal righteously with them by casting them into “Sheol and darkness and destruction” (14:6; 15:10).<\/p>\n<p>The author views God as the King who mightily rules over the nations (2:34ff.) with readiness to judge his enemies and the enemies of the righteous (2:38ff.; 4:9) and to vindicate the righteous (2:39). As the Lord’s care is demonstrated in his sustenance of nature (5:11-12), in his raising up kings, rulers, and nations (5:13), the author assures the reader that his care extends particularly to the poor and those who call upon him (5:2-3, 13). He is the hope of the righteous (8:37).<\/p>\n<p>In view of the foregoing belief in the righteous kingship of God and in his protection of the righteous, the psalms abound in the conviction that evil will be overcome by God’s intervention on behalf of the righteous. The particular context in which these psalms originated was Pompey’s entrance into Jerusalem and his desecration of the temple (63 <span>BC<\/span>), and it was hoped that at the death of Pompey (48 <span>BC<\/span>, cf. 2:30ff.) the messianic era might be introduced. Therefore, the author reminds God of the covenant made with David (17:5) and asks God’s forgiveness for Israel’s sins in the past. Israel has suffered gentile invasions and control as the result of God’s judgment (17:6). Since Pompey had died, the author prayed for the restoration of the theocracy under a Davidic king—“Behold, O Lord, and raise up unto them their king, the son of David. All the time in the which Thou seest, O God, that he may reign over Israel Thy servant” (17:23). By means of the Davidic Messiah the land will be purged of sinners, godless nations, and the righteous will be sanctified. The messianic rule extends only over the righteous remnant, who when restored to the land, will be divided into the 12 tribes; the Davidic Messiah will rule over the tribes and the other nations “in the wisdom of his righteousness” (17:29-31). The sojourner and the gentile nations will not share in the glory of the kingdom. Rather, their position will be that of servitude.<\/p>\n<p>The hope of the glorious future of Israel is the apocalyptic element in the psalms. They arose in a historical context, but they anticipate a radically new future. The psalmist pronounced a benediction on all those who would witness God’s judgment on the nations, the restoration of Israel, and the introduction of the messianic kingdom: “Blessed be they that shall be in those days, in that they shall see the good fortune of Israel which God shall bring to pass in the gathering together of the tribes. May the Lord hasten His mercy upon Israel! The Lord Himself is our king for ever and ever” (17:50-51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"SolomonTestamentof\">Solomon, Testament of<\/p>\n<p>The Testament of Solomon is a second-century <span>BC<\/span> pseudepigraphal writing. The writing claims that Solomon was the writer of the testament. It is extant in Semitic manuscripts, and in some Greek texts.<\/p>\n<p>The material is basically Christian with emphasis on the cross and the virgin birth but also contains Jewish material as well. The testament recounts how Solomon, by means of a ring given to him by the archangel Michael, is able to subdue and use the skills of demons to build his temple. After completing the temple, however, Solomon is led into idolatry on account of his lust for a Shunammite girl. His fall was taken by the author of the testament as an occasion to warn the readers of the power and shapes of the demons and the angels having power over them. The work is written in the form of a testament in order to let Solomon reflect (on his deathbed) how he succeeded and failed as a legacy to Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"TestamentsoftheTwelvePatriarchs\">Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs<\/p>\n<p>Part of the Jewish pseudepigrapha. This particular composition is called a “testament” because it represents the deathbed speeches of each of the sons of Jacob. The testaments start with Reuben’s speech to his sons and ends with Benjamin’s testament to his heirs. Each patriarch is represented as gathering his sons around him and relating the important events of his life. During the speech the patriarch warns against particular vices and attitudes and recommends certain virtues. The advice and warnings of each patriarch often include insight and predictions concerning sin and salvation for his children. The account of the patriarch’s life serves as a guide for the future of his descendants. At the end of the speech, each patriarch dies and is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<p>It would appear that the concept of “testament” finds its orientation in Joshua 23–24, where Joshua summons the elders, heads, judges, and officers of Israel (Jos 23:2; 24:1) and gives them a charge before his death. First Kings 2:1-12 portrays David giving Solomon deathbed advice to walk in God’s ways. The speeches of the patriarchs find further scriptural reference in Genesis chapter 49, where Jacob calls his sons together to hear about their future. At the end of the speech Jacob dies (Gn 49:33).<\/p>\n<p>The present textual form (Slavonic, Armenian, and Greek versions) probably came about sometime during the second or third century <span>AD<\/span>. However, much of the material would appear to go back to the second or third century <span>BC<\/span>. The general scholarly consensus is that an original text in a Semitic language (either Hebrew or Aramaic) was composed by an author or authors sometime in the third or second century before the common era. At some later period, Christian sections were added to the original text. For examples of the Christian sections see Testament of Simeon 6:7; Testament of Levi 10:2; Testament of Dan 6:9; Testament of Naphtali 4:5; Testament of Asher 7:3-4; Testament of Joseph 19:11; Testament of Benjamin 3:8; 9:2-4. It would appear that the testaments may have been reworked by a Jewish writer(s) and by other Christian writers over the centuries. Thus we have a Jewish document from about the third century before the common era that has undergone both Jewish and Christian redactions over a long period of time. These testaments became quite popular in the tenth century, with special interest being displayed in the prophecies of the patriarchs and their secret knowledge.<\/p>\n<p>The following is a summary of each of the testaments of the patriarchs. The excerpts are based on R. H. Charles’s <em>Pseudepigrapha,<\/em> pp 282-367.<\/p>\n<h6>Reuben<\/h6>\n<p>The testament of Reuben is very much influenced by an overwhelming memory of defiling his father’s bed. This refers to Reuben taking his father’s concubine Bilhah while she was in a drunken stupor. Reuben has very strong opinions regarding what he considers to be negative attributes of women, and he warns his sons to be guarded in their relationship with women. His comments on women probably reflect the ill feelings that existed between himself and Jacob in regard to Bilhah. Reuben predicts that in the future his sons would be jealous of the sons of Levi but they would not be able to overthrow them. He admonishes his descendants to have respect and love for one another and to do truth to their neighbors. Reuben is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Simeon<\/h6>\n<p>The patriarch Simeon is presented as a strong warrior type. Reflecting the biblical account of Joseph being sold into slavery (Gn 37:25-28), Simeon testifies that he wanted to kill Joseph rather than sell him into slavery. As punishment for this attitude, God withered his right hand for seven days. Simeon warns his sons against envy, deceit, and fornication. He predicts that they will attempt to harm the sons of Levi but prophesies that the sons of Levi will remain superior. Simeon looked forward to a blissful era (6:4-7a), when the “Most High” would be blessed. Verse 7b is a Christian interpolation, “Because God has taken a body and eaten with men and saved men.” He admonishes his sons to obey the sons of Levi and Judah, for it would be from them that their salvation would be accomplished. He predicts that a high priest would come from Levi and a king would descend from the lines of Judah. Simeon concludes his testament by predicting that all Gentiles (an interpolation) and Israel would be saved.<\/p>\n<h6>Levi<\/h6>\n<p>Levi’s deathbed testament is in the form of dreams that he relates to his sons. He predicts that from his descendants and those of Judah the Lord would “appear among men” to save every race of men (2:11). The descendants of Levi would be “as the sun to all the seed of Israel” (4:3b) and in one dream it is shown that the blessings of the priesthood would come to his sons (8:2-3). Levi predicts that a king would arise in Judah; this king would establish a new priesthood that ministers to both Jews and Gentiles. The tenth chapter has a Christian interpolation that because of ungodliness and transgression, the sons of Levi would wrong “the Savior of the world, Christ” (10:2) and that for this they would be scattered throughout the world. Chapter 13 has a number of wisdom themes with emphasis on the need to follow and obey the law. Chapter 16 introduces an eschatological prediction that the sons of Levi would go astray for 70 weeks. The following chapter gives a detailed account of the 70 weeks in which there would be a priesthood for each jubilee. The first priesthood would be great, and the priest’s relationship to God would be such that God would be addressed as father. The second priesthood would “be conceived in the sorrow of beloved ones” (17:3), but this priesthood will be glorified by all. The following five priesthoods would be characterized by sorrow, pain, hatred, and darkness. However, a new priesthood would eventually arise and peace will be brought to all the earth (18:4); sin shall come to an end (18:9), for this new priesthood shall have a spirit of understanding and sanctification resting upon him. The testament closes with an admonition to choose either the law of the Lord or the work of Beliar (variant of Belial). The sons pledge themselves to the law, and following Levi’s death they bury him at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Judah<\/h6>\n<p>At the beginning of the testament by Judah he tells his descendants that he had been promised by his father that he would be king. “And it came to pass, when I became a man, that my father blessed me, saying, You shall be a king, prospering in all things” (1:6). Judah reminisces about his early youth and his ability to conquer wild animals. He obeyed the commandments and did not give in to lust. He predicted that his descendants would fall into wickedness because of the love of money and the enticement of beautiful women (ch 17). In chapter 21 Judah predicts that the Lord would give the kingship to his descendants and the priesthood to the sons of Levi. Chapter 24 includes a Christian messianic redaction. It is predicted that from the star of Jacob one will arise that will be without sin and from it a rod of righteousness will grow to the Gentiles (24:6). The testament concludes with eschatological hope for the future when “they who are poor for the Lord’s sake shall be made rich and they who are put to death for the Lord’s sake shall awake to life” (25:4). Judah dies and is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Issachar<\/h6>\n<p>The last words of this patriarch are somewhat unique in that Issachar is depicted as being “upright” and without transgression (unlike many of his brothers). He predicts that the priesthood will come from Levi and the kingship will arise from the lineage of Judah. In chapter 6 Issachar predicts that his children will “cleave” after Beliar. If they recognize the mercy of God and follow Issachar’s exemplary life, “every spirit of Beliar will flee from them.” His final request is that he be buried at Hebron with his fathers.<\/p>\n<h6>Zebulun<\/h6>\n<p>The patriarch Zebulun begins his testament by characterizing himself as a “good gift” to his parents. He, like Issachar, indicates that he is not conscious of sinning “except in thought” (and if he has any iniquity it is only the sin of ignorance). Zebulun claims that he did not support the actions taken against Joseph, and he would have told his father about Joseph’s plight except that the other brothers agreed that if “anyone should declare the secret, he should be slain” (1:6). In 1:7 he declares that if it were not for him the other brothers would have killed Joseph. The brothers were so suspicious of Zebulun that they watched him until Joseph was sold. Verse 5:3 has a familiar theme that is found in the NT and in the rabbis: “Have compassion in your hearts, my children, because even as a man does to his neighbor, even so will the Lord do to him.” Zebulun believes that this lesson is demonstrated in practical terms. The sons of the other brothers were sickened and died on account of the action taken against Joseph (“because they showed no mercy in their hearts,” 5:5). The sons of Zebulun were preserved without sickness. He continues his wisdom teaching (8:3) by declaring that in the degree that a man has compassion upon his neighbor the Lord in the same degree will have mercy on him. Zebulun predicts the division between the northern and southern kingdoms and the eventual conquest of these kingdoms by the Gentiles. However, the people will repent and the Lord will bring them back to “the land” and Jerusalem (9:8). In chapter 10 Zebulun predicts that after his death he will “arise as a ruler in the midst of his sons” (10:2), and he promises reward for those who keep the laws and punishment for the ungodly. Zebulun dies at the end of his testament and is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Dan<\/h6>\n<p>The patriarch Dan laments his jealousy of Joseph and indicates that he was controlled by the spirit of Beliar. He reveals that he wanted to kill Joseph so that he could have the love of his father. Dan warns against the spirits of lying and anger, and he exhorts his descendants to love truth and long-suffering. He admonishes them to keep the commandments and “love the Lord through all your life and one another with a true heart” (5:3). Dan predicts that his sons will “in the last days” depart from the Lord and thus provoke the anger of the sons of Levi. They also will fight against the sons of Judah. His sons will not win against the sons of Levi and Judah because an angel of the Lord will guide them. Dan is represented as having read in the book of Enoch (a favorite reference for the patriarchs) that Satan and all the spirits of wickedness and pride will cause the sons of Levi, Judah, and Dan to sin. They will be taken into captivity where they will receive the plagues of Egypt and all the evils of the Gentiles. However, when they return to the Lord they will receive mercy and be given peace. The prediction is such that there would be one who would arise from the tribe of Judah and Levi who is called “the salvation of the Lord.” It would appear that the “one arising” would make war against Beliar and execute an “everlasting vengeance” against their enemies (5:10). Dan’s final warning is to beware of Satan and his spirits and to draw near to God and the angel “that intercedes for you” (6:2). The last section admonishes Dan’s sons to pass on to their children all that they have heard so that “the savior of the Gentiles may receive” them. There follows a Christian polemic about the savior being true, long-suffering, meek, and lowly (6:9). When Dan dies, he is buried near Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.<\/p>\n<h6>Naphtali<\/h6>\n<p>Naphtali is said to be 130 years old when he gives his last words. He is depicted as being in good health, but the morning after a feast realizes that he is going to die. Thus he gathers his sons about him. Naphtali has a very strong sense of order that contributes to the makeup and actions of man as well as the universe. He views the “Gentile problem” as their forsaking the Lord and changing their order so that they obeyed the “stocks and stones.” The change of order was the problem at Sodom and it also caused the Flood.<\/p>\n<p>Naphtali reads from the book of Enoch that his sons will depart from the Lord and walk “according to all lawlessness of the Gentiles” (4:1). He predicts that his descendants will be taken captive because of their sins and afterward a “few” will return to the Lord and he will bring them back to their land. After their return to the land, Naphtali predicts that his sons will forget the Lord and “become ungodly” with the result that they will be scattered all over the earth. They will remain in this state until the compassion of the Lord comes and a man working righteousness and mercy comes to them. Naphtali recounts two dreams that he had in his 40th year. In the first dream he saw the sun and moon stand still. Isaac told his grandsons to run and take hold of the sun and moon, each according to his strength. Levi took hold of the sun, and Judah seized the moon. Both of them were lifted up with the sun and moon. There appeared a bull in the dream with two great horns and eagle wings. The other sons attempted to seize this bull but could not. However, Joseph came and took hold of the bull and ascended “up with him on high” (5:7).<\/p>\n<p>There follows a prediction that the 12 tribes of Israel would be taken into captivity by the Assyrians, Medes, Persians, Chaldeans, and Syrians. The other dream saw a ship sailing on the sea of Jamnia without sailors or pilot. Written on the ship was the inscription “The ship of Jacob” (6:2). Jacob and his sons were on the ship, and when a storm arose Jacob departed from their presence. Eventually the ship breaks up from the pounding of the sea, and while Joseph sails off in a little boat the rest of the brothers are divided among nine planks with Levi and Judah sharing a plank. It would appear that by the prayers of Levi all the brothers eventually land safely on the shore. When Naphtali relates these dreams to his father, Jacob responds that all these things must be fulfilled.<\/p>\n<p>Naphtali admonished his sons to be united to Levi and Judah for through them “shall salvation arise to Israel” (8:2). Also through Levi and Judah the righteous of the Gentiles shall be gathered. Naphtali died and was buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Gad<\/h6>\n<p>The patriarch Gad is represented as hating Joseph because Joseph had told his father that Gad and some of the other brothers were eating from the best of the flocks while tending them. During his testament Gad confesses his sin of hatred to his sons and warns them against harboring hatred because it only brings anguish: “For as love would quicken even the dead and would call back them that are condemned to die, so hatred would slay the living and those that had sinned venially it would not suffer to live” (4:6).<\/p>\n<p>Repentance is understood to give knowledge to the soul and leads the mind to salvation. Gad encourages his sons to honor the lineage of Levi and Judah, for therein is found the salvation of Israel. He predicts that his sons will walk in all wickedness and corruption and ends on a somewhat pessimistic note by asking to be buried near his fathers. Gad is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Asher<\/h6>\n<p>Asher is very conscious of good and evil spirits and the choice that man has to make between these two possibilities. Asher predicts that his descendants will act ungodly and not give heed to the law of God. Thus they will be delivered into the hands of their enemies and they will be scattered. They will exist in such a state until the “Most High” visits the earth “coming Himself [as man with men eating and drinking] . . . he shall save Israel and all the Gentiles” (7:3-4). This Christian interpolation is followed by a declaration that the Lord will gather them because of his mercy and for the sake of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. When Asher dies, he is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Joseph<\/h6>\n<p>Joseph calls himself the “beloved of Israel,” (1:2) and although he has seen envy and death, he did not go astray. During his testament he tells of his ordeal of being sold into slavery. The verses in chapter one are set in parallelism with the first half of the verse telling the plight of Joseph and the second half exalting the security of the Lord: “I was sold into slavery, and the Lord of all made me free: I was taken into captivity, and his strong hand succoured me. I was beset with hunger and the Lord himself nourished me” (1:5). Joseph details his experiences in Egypt with eight chapters being given to the temptations of the Egyptian woman. However, Joseph resisted her advances and the Lord rewarded him for his convictions. He admonishes his sons to have the fear of the Lord in all their works because whoever does the law of the Lord will be loved by him. This is the key to his success. Joseph encourages his children to do well to anyone who would do evil to them and pray for their enemies. He gives his attitude toward his brothers as an example of such a virtue.<\/p>\n<p>Joseph admonishes his sons to observe the commandments of the Lord and honor Levi and Judah for “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, who saves all the Gentiles and Israel” (19:11) shall arise from them. He predicts the enslavement in Egypt but also the eventual deliverance. He directs his sons to take his bones with them when they leave Egypt, and the testament indicates that Joseph was buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<h6>Benjamin<\/h6>\n<p>The last patriarch gives his testament when he is 125 years old. He encourages his children to love the Lord and keep his commandments. He urges them to follow the goodness of Joseph, for he did not want his brothers’ actions against him to be counted as sin. Benjamin predicts that in Joseph shall the prophecy be fulfilled “concerning the Lamb of God and Savior of the world, and that a blameless one shall be delivered up for lawless men, and a sinless one shall die for ungodly men in the blood of the covenant, for the salvation of the Gentiles and of Israel and shall destroy Beliar and his servants” (3:8). One can immediately see how the Christian interpolation would find easy access for a polemic in this testament. Joseph is depicted as suffering in innocence and without remorse. Likewise the Christian messiah would suffer and die for ungodly men.<\/p>\n<p>Benjamin believes that there are evildoers among his sons; from his reading of the book of Enoch he predicts that they will commit “fornication with the fornication of Sodom” and only a few will survive (9:1). There would appear to be a remnant from each tribe as the 12 tribes and the Gentiles will gather at the last temple. Their salvation will be a result of the “Most High” sending his only “begotten prophet” (9:2), and he will be lifted up upon a tree and the veil of the temple shall be rent and the Spirit of God shall be passed on to the Gentiles. Benjamin admonishes his sons that if they walk in holiness according to the commandments of the Lord, all of Israel will be gathered to the Lord. When Benjamin dies, he is buried at Hebron.<\/p>\n<p>From the brief account of each patriarch, it is apparent that the testaments were subject to both Jewish and Christian redaction and go beyond mere interpolation. The text reflects such characteristics as two messiahs, a double love commandment, ethical and theological teachings, as well as universal salvation. However, it is most difficult to place these features within a particular time period or even religion.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ThaddeusActsof\">Thaddeus, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>A sixth-century version and extension of the fifth-century Syriac Doctrina Addaei, or Legend of Abgar. The Legend contains a purported exchange of letters between Abgar, king of Edessa (<span>AD<\/span> 9–46), and Jesus. This exchange results in the sending of Thaddeus, one of Jesus’ apostles, to Edessa. While there, he performs numerous miracles including the healing of Abgar. The Acts has Abgar healed when Ananias, his messenger, returns prior to the arrival of Thaddeus. The Acts focuses on the activity of Thaddeus in establishing the church in Edessa.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"TheclaActsofPauland\">Thecla, Acts of Paul and<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Paul and Thecla, Acts of (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ThomasActsof\">Thomas, Acts of<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of Thomas is one of a cluster of acts of the apostles that have three common characteristics. They narrate the propagation of the gospel around the ancient world, promote the deeds and words of one of the apostles, and inevitably chronicle that apostle’s martyrdom. The oldest of these “acts narratives” are those of Paul, John, Andrew, Peter, and Thomas. Acts of Thomas, like the others, is a blend of Christian piety, the popular Hellenistic romances of the day, and Jewish haggadic-type moralistic teachings.<\/p>\n<p>Scholarly study of the Acts of Thomas suggests that it was probably written at the beginning of the third century. It was definitely written in Syriac first and probably by someone with strong tendencies toward the Gnostic heresy. It proved broadly popular among Gnostics, Manichees, and orthodox churches, so much so that it was quickly translated from the original Syriac into Arabic, Armenian, and several Greek translations. From these varied Greek versions, Coptic, Latin, and Ethiopic translations were made. Significant portions of the Coptic version were in turn retranslated back into Arabic, Ethiopic, and Greek, thus creating a most confusing textual tradition. Only one full early Syriac text survives, and it is considered less reliable than some of the extant Greek translations.<\/p>\n<p>In the critical English edition of the Acts of Thomas, that of A. F. J. Klijn published in 1962, the narrative is divided into the traditional acts (praxeis). There are 13 of these numbered in 170 sequential chapters that include the concluding martyrdom of the apostle. Various liturgical pieces, sermon fragments, and hymns are inserted, including two particularly famous hymns in the early church—that of the “Song of the Bride” in act 1 and that of the “Song of the Pearl” in act 9. The first six acts are not woven together by any particular theme, and they record that Thomas went on board ship to go to India (act 3), which would imply a south Indian ministry. Yet the text speaks of ministry to the north Indian king, Gundaphoro (act 4). However, acts 7 through 13 and the martyrdom are set in the south Indian kingdom of Mazdai and are obviously written by one hand. It is probable that the first six acts represent earlier materials placed into the whole by the writer of the last seven acts and the martyrdom. This document is the first-known mention of the traditions that Thomas ministered in India, was martyred there, and that his bones were returned to Edessa. Acts of Thomas is written, as are all the apocryphal acts of the apostles, on the assumption that the world was divided among the apostles for evangelization and that India fell to Thomas.<\/p>\n<p>Thomas is called Judas Thomas throughout these acts after the Syrian style of referring to that apostle. Thomas is spoken of as the twin of Jesus (the Didymus of the NT), as recipient of special divine revelations, and as being Jesus incarnate in the flesh again—in chapters 10, 11, 39, 47, and 48 of the Acts. Many historians think these are clear indications of Gnostic thought. Others think such ideas are expressions of Jesus’ adaptation to human perception and identification with his apostles—features often found in early Christian literature. There seems to be no question but that Gnostic or Manichee tendencies were gradually edited out of Greek and Latin texts by orthodox copyists.<\/p>\n<p>One quickly gets the feel for this narrative. The Acts of Thomas opens with Judas Thomas’s refusing to go to India. He is then sold as a slave—in parallel to Christ’s coming as a slave to redeem man. So Thomas reaches India as a carpenter (again the parallel with Jesus) and a builder of homes. He plays groomsman in a wedding at which miracles convince the flute player of Thomas’s role as apostle of God; so the king asks Thomas to pray for his daughter. Great stress is placed on purity in Thomas’s teaching, and this usually involves sexual abstinence as well. Finally, many are converted, including the king, and they form an assembly of believers in Sandaruk.<\/p>\n<p>In the second act the king, Gundophor, gives Thomas a large sum of money to build a palace. After surprising the king by tracing the palace on the ground in winter, Thomas builds him a palace in heaven by giving the money to the poor. The king imprisons and decides to kill Thomas for the supposed deception; but the king’s brother, Gad, dies and goes to heaven where he sees the palace and desires to buy it. Gad is then reunited with his body and tries to buy the palace from Gundophor, whereupon Gundophor learns that he cannot sell it, releases Thomas from prison, and advises Gad to arrange to have his own palace built in heaven. Thomas gives a great doxology (ch 25 of act 2), and the two brothers who have come to believe through all of this want to be baptized.<\/p>\n<p>In these miracle narratives and teachings, all the books of the NT seem to be echoed, though there are relatively few direct quotations. Favorite miracle passages such as Balaam’s talking donkey and Peter’s release from prison are reexperienced in Thomas’s life with vast embellishment. The talking ass enters a home and casts out a demon at Thomas’s command; Thomas causes great consternation by repeatedly passing in and out of the securely closed prison. Such miracles, sufferings, and conversions make up acts 3 through 13 and continue to the climax of Judas Thomas’s ministry. His martyrdom occurs (ch 168) at the hands of four soldiers with spears who have been ordered by the king of Mazdai to execute Thomas. He thereafter appears to his followers who have Thomas’s bones removed to Edessa. Meantime, the son of the king of Mazdai becomes sick unto death. Desperate, the king goes to Thomas’s tomb, thinking to get a relic to heal his son. Finding the body gone, he uses the very dust upon which Judas Thomas’s body rested, and his son is healed. Thereafter the king becomes a believer and joins the community of believers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ThomasGospelof\">Thomas, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>A noncanonical and heretical gospel of Gnostic origin that probably dates from the second or third century <span>AD<\/span>. It is one of a large number of similar writings that flourished among early religious sects such as the Marcosians (a second-century group that built an elaborate sacramental system around numbers) and the Manicheans (a third-century dualistic heresy based on the primeval conflict between light and darkness). In fact, Cyril of Jerusalem, who died in <span>AD<\/span> 386 says the Gospel of Thomas was written by “one of those wicked disciples of Mani” (the founder of Manichaeism). Along with the Protevangelium of James, it is one of the oldest and most widely known of the more than 50 apocryphal gospels that circulated within the churches during the period of their early growth and expansion.<\/p>\n<p>This Gospel of Thomas (sometimes referred to as an “infancy gospel”) should not be confused with the Coptic version that was unearthed in 1945 near Nag Hammadi in Upper Egypt. The latter is a collection of 114 “sayings of Jesus,” which shed a great deal of light on the influence of Gnosticism on Egyptian Christianity. They claim to be the “secret words” of Jesus transmitted by “Didymos Judas Thomas.” The Gospel of Thomas, with which this article deals, is composed of a series of childhood miracles of Jesus and is preserved for us in four versions—two in Greek (one quite a bit longer than the other), one in Latin, and one in Syriac.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of Thomas was apparently known as early as Hippolytus (<span>AD<\/span> 155–235), who quotes it as saying, “He who seeks me will find me in children from seven years old; for there will I, who am hidden in the fourteenth aeon, be found.” Hippolytus claimed that it was used by the Naasenes (a Gnostic sect that worshiped the serpent) in support of their doctrine of the nature of the inward man. The quotation above is not found in the extant versions, but this is understandable because there is evidence from the Stichometry of Nicephorus (possibly fourth century) that an earlier version was over twice the length. The Gospel of Thomas was known both to Origen (c. <span>AD<\/span> 185–254) and Eusebius (c. <span>AD<\/span> 260–340). The latter classed it with the heretical writings and said it should be “rejected as altogether absurd and impious” (<em>Historia Ecclesiastica<\/em> 3.25).<\/p>\n<p>The stories that make up the Gospel of Thomas emphasize the miraculous power and supernatural wisdom of the boy Jesus. Some scholars think they were originally fabricated by orthodox Christians in opposition to the Gnostic heresy that the “supernatural Christ” first came upon Jesus at the time of his baptism. It is much more likely, however, that they owe their origin to people’s curiosity about what the boy Jesus must have been like. Some of the tales may have come from pagan sources.<\/p>\n<p>Apart from three or four miracles, which could be classed as beneficial, the supernatural feats said to be performed by the boy Jesus were destructive. For example, when a certain child spoiled some pools made by Jesus, he was cursed by Jesus and totally withered up. Another boy who provoked Jesus by running into him “immediately . . . fell down and died.” A teacher who struck Jesus on the head was straightway cursed and fell to the ground. The French writer Renan referred to the Jesus of the Gospel of Thomas as “a vicious little guttersnipe.”<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the gospel Jesus is presented as infinitely wise. He ridicules his teacher Zacchaeus saying, “You hypocrite, first, if you know it, teach the Alpha, and then we will believe you concerning the Beta.” After Zacchaeus berates himself for being so inferior to the one he intended to take as a disciple, Jesus laughs and announces, “I am come from above that I may curse them.” The text continues, “And no man after that dared to provoke him, lest he should curse him, and he should be maimed.”<\/p>\n<p>Other miracles include making 12 live sparrows out of clay, smiting his accusers with blindness, raising a child from the dead, healing a foot cut in two by an ax, carrying water in a cloth garment, reaping an enormous harvest from one kernal of wheat, stretching a piece of wood to its proper length, and healing his brother James who had been bitten by a viper while gathering fagots (sticks to use as firewood). More miracles may be found in the longer Latin version.<\/p>\n<p>It comes as no surprise that the orthodox church has always rejected from its canon of sacred scripture the apocryphal Gospel of Thomas. It is, however, quoted in other later gospels of the same sort. For example, the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew from chapter 18 on is based upon the Gospel of Thomas. Along with other apocryphal materials, it has exercised a significant influence on Christian art and literature, especially from the tenth century forward. For example, the account of Jesus making the 12 sparrows from clay shows up in the Koran.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"TruthGospelof\">Truth, Gospel of<\/p>\n<p>Around 1945 a group of Egyptian peasant farmers near modern Nag Hammadi inadvertently dug into a grave of the ancient village known as Shenesit-Chenoboskion and unearthed a jar containing 13 books (9 of which were largely complete) and 15 fragments of works. This find was the library of an ancient Gnostic sect and contained all or parts of 51 different Gnostic writings—all but two of which had never come into modern scholars’ hands before. Now called the Nag Hammadi or Chenoboskion texts, these works were the first modern find of original Gnostic literature. All are Coptic translations of earlier Greek originals.<\/p>\n<p>Codex I (titled the Jung Codex because it now is owned by the Jung Institute in Vienna) is unique among the 13 works because it is in Sub-Achimimic Coptic, while the rest of the works are in the more usual Sahidic Coptic. Codex I contains five works, two of which are the enormously controversial Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Truth.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of Truth has no heading but rather draws its title from the incipit (first line of the text); it has no author; it contains no addressee. In fact, it is not a gospel at all, but rather a treatise expressive of Valentinian Gnosticism at its very earliest stage. Because the Gnosticism expressed in the Gospel of Truth is lacking all later-Valentinian mythological development and because it is stated simply and in almost orthodox Christian thought forms, the majority of modern scholars credit it to Valentinus himself, though no final proof of this has been discovered as yet. If Valentinus himself did not write this document, then it had to be someone in the immediate circle of his initial disciples.<\/p>\n<p>Valentinus was born in Egypt around <span>AD<\/span> 100 to 110. He received a thorough education at Alexandria, became a Christian, and taught first in Egypt before moving to Rome around <span>AD<\/span> 136, where he stayed until 154 or 155. Tertullian, in his work against heresy, seems to imply that Valentinus was twice expelled from the Roman church; he states that Valentinus was a brilliant and eloquent man who had hopes of becoming a bishop in Rome at one time. Valentinus attracted able followers who later expanded his teachings almost beyond recognition. But when he left Rome sometime after 154 or 155, he had made a final break with orthodoxy and was teaching a form of Gnostic heresy the product of which was the Gospel of Truth, written by himself or someone of his immediate circle. There is a surviving statement that Valentinus taught subsequently in Cyprus, and then he vanishes into the mists of history.<\/p>\n<p>Irenaeus said the Gospel of Truth is no gospel, for it is unlike the four Gospels (<em>Against Heresies<\/em> 3.2.9). Irenaeus was certainly correct, for the work is not a narrative. Nor does the Gospel of Truth contain any story about Jesus, any place name of any type, any date, or any mention of any person other than Jesus, who is only mentioned five times.<\/p>\n<p>More than 60 times, this brief work uses the notions of knowledge or needing to know. This knowledge is born from within as the soul returns to itself, finding there what Deity deposited in it—or perhaps better, finding there the residue of Deity still entrapped within it. Thus whoever has Gnosis has simply taken what is his and can know where he or she comes from and for where he or she is bound. Christ’s role was to present the “Book of the Living” or the “Living Book.” “Book” is understood, not as the gospel proclamation of the life and teachings of Jesus, but rather as the primordial gospel or truth that existed before creation. It was error and ignorance that rebelled against the Savior and nailed him to the tree. Implied in this, though not explicitly stated, is the Gnostic understanding that it was also divine error and ignorance out of which matter emerged or was created. Salvation for living beings entrapped in this matter comes with return to unalloyed Deity. The path of this return is Gnosis (knowledge). The Pleroma, the fullness of the Deity, went out into the depths of matter in search of the elect among beings by way of Jesus and the cross.<\/p>\n<p>While these traits of Gnosticism are clear, this gospel is much closer to orthodoxy than most Gnostic Chenoboskion writings because it mentions only one Son of God, not several emanations; it does not split Jesus into a physical Jesus and a divine Christ; and most strikingly, Sophia, the usual central character in the Gnostic cosmic drama, does not appear at all. It is for these reasons among others that the Gospel of Truth is placed very close to Valentinus’s break with orthodoxy.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of Truth has assumed some degree of importance in NT studies beyond that warranted by its heretical content because it everywhere assumes our full NT canon. By some scholars’ counts, there are no less than 83 places where the Gospel of Truth echoes NT canonical books—in spite of the fact it does not cite a single saying of Jesus directly. Most particularly, it relies heavily on the book of Revelation and the Epistle to the Hebrews.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VirginAssumptionofthe\">Virgin, Assumption of the<\/p>\n<p>A widely circulated legend dealing with the death and translation of the Virgin Mary. None of the many versions is earlier than the fourth century. Most go back to Egypt. In the Coptic versions, Jesus himself appears to Mary before the apostles depart on their missionary labors; Jesus announces her coming death and translation. In the other form an angel makes the announcement. Mary requests the presence of all the apostles, who are miraculously brought on the clouds. Mary is transfigured, and many healings result from contact with her dead body. She is transported to heaven by Jesus shortly after her death.<\/p>\n<p>This legend itself took on a new interest and importance when in 1950 “The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin” was made a part of official Roman Catholic dogma.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"VirginLifeofthe\">Virgin, Life of the<\/p>\n<p>There are a number of accounts of the early life and existence of the Virgin Mary. Most of them come to us through Coptic texts. They tell of the birth of Mary to Joachim (also called Cleopas) and Anna, who had been taunted by friends for having no children. Mary was born after a vision of a white dove. In some accounts Mary was dedicated to the Lord and then committed to the care of a man, Joseph. While she was in the house weaving on the veil of the temple, angels would come to minister to her. The annunciation by Gabriel is given at great length. The birth of Jesus is described in detail while Joseph is searching for a midwife, Salome. Other accounts go on to describe tender scenes between Mary and the child Jesus. In some of these versions, there is a reckless identification of the Virgin Mary with all of the other Marys of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h3\" id=\"ZebulunTestamentof\">Zebulun, Testament of<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (above).<\/p>","summary_ro":"APOCRYPHA* Books excluded from the canon of Scripture. Preview • Introduction • Apocryphal Gospels • Apocryphal Acts • Apocryphal Epistles • Apocalyptic Apocrypha • Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings Introduction The writings of the Old and New Testaments tended to attract certain additional compositions in the form of books, parts of books, letters, “gospels,” apocalypses, and so on. Most of the authors wrote anonymously, but some presented their writings to the public under the name of ...","summary_en":"APOCRYPHA* Books excluded from the canon of Scripture. Preview • Introduction • Apocryphal Gospels • Apocryphal Acts • Apocryphal Epistles • Apocalyptic Apocrypha • Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings Introduction The writings of the Old and New Testaments tended to attract certain additional compositions in the form of books, parts of books, letters, “gospels,” apocalypses, and so on. Most of the authors wrote anonymously, but some presented their writings to the public under the name of ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5906,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Caesars","title_en":"the Caesars","content_ro":"<h3>CAESARS, The<\/h3>\n<p>Succession of Roman emperors. The name Caesar, which has derivatives in the German Kaiser, Dutch Keizer, and Russian Czar, goes back to the family name of Julius Caesar (100–44 <span>BC<\/span>), which his successors took to themselves. Luke’s Gospel mentions Caesar Augustus (Lk 2:1) and Tiberius Caesar (Lk 3:1). In the book of Acts the title “Caesar” is used to refer to Nero (Acts 25:11-12, 21; 26:32; 27:24; 28:19). During NT times, 12 Caesars reigned, 6 of them actually of the Caesarean lineage.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EmperorsofCaesarsLineage\">Emperors of Caesar’s Lineage<\/p>\n<h5>Julius Caesar (100–44 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/h5>\n<p>Julius had imperial powers but never held the title of emperor. Rome had been a republic (really an aristocracy) for almost 500 years. Its citizens hated the idea of a monarch, a position Julius Caesar judiciously declined, accepting a republican office but ruling as virtual dictator. The republic was dead in practice if not in principle. Vainly hoping to revive it and fearing Caesar’s imperial ambitions, a group of republicans conspired to assassinate him. Caesar was murdered on March 15 (the “ides of March”), 44 <span>BC<\/span>, as he entered the Roman Senate. Although the conspiracy succeeded, its purpose failed. In the civil war that followed, Caesar’s grand-nephew Octavian emerged as victor and in 31 <span>BC<\/span> became the first Roman emperor.<\/p>\n<h5>Augustus (63 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14, reigned 31 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14)<\/h5>\n<p>Gaius Octavianus (Octavian) was the grandson of Julia, Julius Caesar’s sister. He was 18 and studying in Greece when his great-uncle was assassinated. Caesar’s will, which adopted him as son and made him heir, brought him into the resulting power struggle.<\/p>\n<p>Within a year and a half, a trio consisting of Antony, Lepidus, and Octavian was confirmed in power. The following year, in a battle at Philippi (in Macedonia, now Greece), Octavian defeated both Cassius and Brutus, the chief conspirators against Caesar. Antony took command of the eastern provinces (which included Greece and Egypt), Octavian led his forces back to Italy, and Lepidus assumed jurisdiction over Gaul and western North Africa. Lepidus, however, was forced into retirement, and the area he controlled fell to Octavian. Thus Octavian and Antony, who had clashed even before their alliance, became rivals again. In the battle of Actium (31 <span>BC<\/span>), Octavian defeated Antony to become sole ruler of the Roman world and its first emperor.<\/p>\n<p>Octavian did not possess the military brilliance of his great-uncle, but he had a talent for ending strife and maintaining peace, which immediately gained him the support of the people. During his reign Roman culture enjoyed a golden age, particularly in architecture and literature. Augustus founded the Praetorian Guard, the emperor’s private honor corps of 9,000 soldiers. Originally intended to secure the emperor’s position, it later became so influential that it could independently depose an emperor or elect a new one without Senate confirmation.<\/p>\n<p>The title Augustus <em>(Augoustos),<\/em> meaning “exalted one,” was given to Octavian in 27 <span>BC<\/span>. The title reflects the practice of emperor worship that had been partly initiated in the reign of Julius Caesar, who declared himself to be “the unconquered god” and “the father of the fatherland.” Augustus continued the cult, although at first he declared that he should be worshiped only in association with the goddess Roma. Later, however, Augustus’s name became equated with Rome, and the emperor was regarded as the savior of the world. A temple to Augustus was built in Athens, and even Herod the Great built temples in his honor.<\/p>\n<p>When Augustus became emperor, he devoted himself to reorganizing his empire. Because of the chaos that had prevailed in the provinces, he took it upon himself to restructure economic and financial policies.<\/p>\n<p>Though Caesar Augustus is mentioned only once in the NT, he nevertheless is known to every reader of the Bible because of the census he decreed in all the provinces just before the birth of Jesus (Lk 2:1). Little information is available about that census, but Luke wrote that the first census was held when Jesus was born. The second was conducted in <span>AD<\/span> 6 and resulted in an uprising instigated by Judas of Galilee (Acts 5:37).<\/p>\n<p>During the time of Augustus’s reign, Herod the Great gained the emperor’s trust and was allowed to rule the Jews without Roman interference. In appreciation Herod rebuilt the old city of Samaria and renamed it Sebaste to honor Augustus. Caesarea on the Mediterranean coast of Palestine was also named in his honor.<\/p>\n<p>Conflicts between Herod and his sons were settled by Augustus in 12 <span>BC<\/span>. When dispute between father and sons arose again, however, Augustus ordered that it be settled in a Roman court, which ruled in 7 <span>BC<\/span> that two of them, Alexander and Aristobulus, be executed. In 4 <span>BC<\/span>, Augustus permitted the execution of Herod’s son Antipater.<\/p>\n<p>In Herod’s last will and testament, three of his sons (Archelaus, Antipas, and Philip) were appointed to rule his kingdom. Augustus’s approval of those appointments was necessary. Archelaus made a personal visit to Rome immediately after the death of his father to request possible changes in his status. Likewise, Antipas journeyed to Rome to see whether Augustus might be willing to grant him royal status as well. While the two of them sought separate audiences with the emperor, a delegation representing the people of Judea appeared before Augustus with the request that the Herodian rule—which was never very popular—be terminated. At the same time riots in Judea had to be suppressed by Roman legions sent from Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Augustus compromised. He converted Herod’s old kingdom to a Roman province and refused kingship to all of Herod’s sons. Otherwise he kept to the provisions of Herod’s testament: Archelaus became ethnarch (overlord) of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea (half of the new province); Antipas became tetrarch of Galilee and Perea (one quarter of the province); Philip became tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis (Lk 3:1; an area east of Galilee—the final quarter of the province). Because Archelaus was unable to rule effectively, he was deposed by the emperor in <span>AD<\/span> 6 and banished to Vienne in southern France.<\/p>\n<p>Augustus died in <span>AD<\/span> 14 after a brief illness, leaving the empire to his appointed successor, Tiberius.<\/p>\n<h5>Tiberius (42 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 37, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 14–37)<\/h5>\n<p>Tiberius Claudius Nero became Octavian’s stepson at the age of four, when his mother, Livia, divorced his father to marry the future emperor. Tiberius was made Augustus’s co-regent in <span>AD<\/span> 13 and succeeded him the following year. When he became emperor, he changed his name to Tiberius Caesar Augustus.<\/p>\n<p>Tiberius did not have an easy life. His stepfather had forced an unhappy marriage upon him. The Roman Senate often opposed him. In <span>AD<\/span> 27 Tiberius left Rome for the island of Capri, leaving the task of governing the empire in the hands of Sejanus, a Roman prefect (high-ranking official). During the next five years, Sejanus secretly tried to depose the emperor and seize power for himself. His conspiracy almost succeeded, but Tiberius eventually had him executed. Despite this, Tiberius’s administration was characterized by wisdom, intelligence, prudence, and duty. He continued his predecessor’s policy of striving for peace and security.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 26, presumably before going into semiretirement, Tiberius appointed Pontius Pilate as governor of Judea. Directly responsible to the emperor, Pilate could be immediately removed from office if word of Jewish disturbances or complaints reached Tiberius. Pilate’s capitulation to the Jewish authorities during the trial of Jesus can be best understood in view of this. The Jews accused Jesus of claiming to be king, implying a rivalry with the emperor. When Pilate judged Christ innocent of the charge and sought to release him (Jn 18:33-38), the Jews insisted he could not do so and still be a friend of Caesar (19:12). If he released Jesus, they insinuated, he would risk losing the emperor’s favor. Because of crimes committed at his command against the Jews, Pilate knew they might carry out their threat, resulting in his banishment. So, surrendering to their demands, he condemned Jesus to death by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Tiberius Caesar is mentioned only once in the NT. The Gospel of Luke states that John the Baptist began his ministry in the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar’s reign, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea (Lk 3:1). Whether that date was calculated from Tiberius’s actual accession or from the time of his co-regency is difficult to determine.<\/p>\n<p>Tiberius was a strangely humble emperor. At his own request he was never officially recognized as a god (a sort of honorary title that the Senate had given to his predecessors). Interest in emperor worship had waned, and Tiberius intended to confine deity to his two predecessors. He also stopped the practice of naming months of the year after emperors; thus there is a July for Julius, an August for Augustus, but no Tiber for Tiberius. Plagued by domestic and political problems all his life, Tiberius died a tired and dejected old man. In fact, he was an excellent administrator.<\/p>\n<h5>Caligula (<span>AD<\/span> 12–41, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 37–41)<\/h5>\n<p>At the death of Tiberius, Gaius Julius Caesar became emperor at the age of 25. He was the son of an influential general, Germanicus; Augustus had forced Tiberius to adopt Gaius and make him his heir. As a child, Gaius had accompanied Germanicus on his military duties along the Rhine River in Germany. The soldiers nicknamed him Caligula (“Little Boot”) for his military attire. The name stuck.<\/p>\n<p>To gain popularity with the Romans, Caligula began his reign by pardoning people and recalling exiles. He squandered the money of the Roman treasury, however, and was forced to levy new taxes. His popularity was short-lived.<\/p>\n<p>Six months after assuming office, Caligula suffered a serious illness that left him insane. On one occasion, for example, he appointed his horse as consul (chief magistrate). He insulted many people, banished others on whim, and had others murdered without provocation. When he felt that he had been insulted by the Jews in Jamnia, a Judean town near the Mediterranean coast, he ordered a statue of himself placed in the temple at Jerusalem in revenge. The Jews were outraged, and a full-scale revolt was avoided only by the prudence of the governor of Syria, Petronius, who delayed carrying out the order. Not long afterward the emperor was assassinated by one of the many men he had insulted.<\/p>\n<p>It was Caligula who appointed Herod Agrippa I (Herod in Acts 12) king over a tetrarchy northeast of Galilee—one of the first acts he performed as emperor, according to the Jewish historian Josephus. The two had become close friends before either had come to power, while Agrippa was living in Rome, where even as king he later spent much of his time. But unlike Caligula, Agrippa was a capable and popular ruler. Both king and emperor, in the tradition of many eastern monarchs, fancied themselves gods. Caligula, in fact, revived the notion in Rome of the emperor’s deity and madly proclaimed himself equal to Jupiter. The Senate, however, refrained from officially recognizing that status.<\/p>\n<h5>Claudius (10 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 54, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 41–54)<\/h5>\n<p>Tiberius Claudius Germanicus was born in Lyon (France). He was Tiberius’s nephew and a grandson of Livia, the wife of Augustus. In <span>AD<\/span> 37 he was appointed consul by Caligula. After Caligula’s death Claudius was proclaimed emperor by the Praetorian Guard, and the Senate approved the choice.<\/p>\n<p>When Claudius became emperor, he faced the task of healing the broken relationships caused by Caligula’s madness. He ended the persecution of Jews in the city of Alexandria. Josephus recorded an edict that Claudius sent to Egypt, which read, in part: “Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, high priest and tribune of the people, ordains thus. . . . I will, therefore, that the nation of the Jews be not deprived of their rights and privileges on account of the madness of Gaius; but that those rights and privileges that they formerly enjoyed, be preserved to them, and that they may continue in their own customs.”<\/p>\n<p>That change of policy reflected the emperor’s friendship with Herod Agrippa, who had played an influential role in Claudius’s succession as emperor. Claudius, in turn, added Judea and Samaria to Agrippa’s kingdom, giving him the dominion that once belonged to his grandfather, Herod the Great. He also promoted him to consular rank. Further, having complete trust in Agrippa’s abilities, Claudius removed Judea from Roman provincial rule.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa’s rule, however, was of short duration. In order to please the Jews, he had the apostle James, Zebedee’s son, killed. He also had the apostle Peter imprisoned, planning to have him executed after the Passover feast in the spring of <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:1-5). Peter escaped. During the summer of that year, Agrippa, who was wearing a glistening garment made of silver thread, gave a speech from his throne. The people acclaimed him as a god (v 22), and immediately he was struck down by an angel of the Lord. Five days later he died.<\/p>\n<p>The emperor wished to stay on the right side of the Jewish people, yet five years after the death of Agrippa, Claudius issued an edict expelling all Jews from Rome. Luke related that Aquila and Priscilla were among those who had been ordered to leave the imperial city (Acts 18:2). The Roman biographer and historian Suetonius wrote that “because the Jews of Rome were indulging in constant riots at the instigation of Chrestus he [Claudius] expelled them from the city.” The writer could easily have been uncertain of the spelling, because Chrestus, a common slave name, was pronounced virtually the same as Christus. It appears that Suetonius sought to convey to his readers that Chrestus was the founder of a movement (presumably Christianity).<\/p>\n<p>Because of mismanagement by Caligula, the supply of grain for food was at an all-time low when Claudius began to reign (cf. Acts 11:28). Josephus related that during Claudius’s administration, famine plagued Judea, Samaria, and Galilee. To alleviate the famine in Jerusalem, Helena, mother of the king of Adiabene, bought grain from Egypt and dried figs from Cyprus. That must have taken place in <span>AD<\/span> 45–46. Various ancient historians, including Tacitus, Suetonius, and Eusebius, reported that on frequent occasions famines prevailed in Rome and elsewhere. Repeatedly, harvests were minimal and distribution of food supplies was poor.<\/p>\n<p>Claudius’s family life and reputation were marred by intrigue. His immoral third wife, Messalina, was eventually put to death. Causing a slight scandal, he married his niece Agrippina, who had a son by a former marriage. She wanted her son Nero to be emperor, but Britannicus, Messalina’s son, stood first in line. In <span>AD<\/span> 54, when Claudius decided that Britannicus should succeed him, Agrippina poisoned her husband and made Nero emperor. The Senate officially deified Claudius, making him the third emperor to receive that honor.<\/p>\n<h5>Nero (<span>AD<\/span> 37–68, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 54–68)<\/h5>\n<p>Nero was born Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus. His father was a senator and consul who died when Nero was still a boy. His mother, Agrippina, Germanicus’s daughter, was reputed to be one of the wealthiest and most beautiful women in Rome. When she married the emperor, her son received the name Nero Claudius Caesar Germanicus at his adoption by Claudius.<\/p>\n<p>Nero was at first dominated by his proud mother, who wished to reign alongside her son. In those years Rome was a hotbed of political intrigue, murder plots, and assassinations. During the first five years of his reign, Nero had Britannicus and Agrippina eliminated in quick succession. A few years later he banished his wife, Octavia, and had her killed.<\/p>\n<p>Ironically, the church at Rome flourished at that same time. The last chapter of the apostle Paul’s Letter to the Romans, written from Corinth in <span>AD<\/span> 57, contains a long and impressive list of names of personal acquaintances—especially impressive because Paul had never been in Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nero had reigned more than five years when Paul, imprisoned at Caesarea, appealed to Caesar (Acts 25:11). Motives for the appeal may have been a prison release for Paul and an opportunity to seek legal recognition of Christianity. Paul’s appeal to Caesar, however, does not necessarily mean that he was judged by Nero. The emperor had made it known at the beginning of his reign that he would not be a judge. Instead, he appointed prefects of the Praetorian Guard to judge cases for him. In the early part of <span>AD<\/span> 62, Nero changed that rule and judged a case himself. Therefore, whether Paul stood before Nero or before one of the prefects is difficult to determine. If prosecutors failed to appear, Paul’s case may not have come before the judge at all. According to Philippians 1:7-14, Paul was still expecting a trial at the time of his writing that letter.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 62 Nero’s adviser Afranius Burrus died. Burrus had been a prefect of the Praetorian Guard and, together with an able senator, Seneca, had ruled the empire effectively while Nero spent his time on pleasure. After Burrus’s death (Seneca was forced to commit suicide three years later), Nero began to indulge his whims unchecked. His greedy advisers, who sought self-advancement at the expense of the state, caused a severe financial crisis. Nero was also unbalanced in regarding himself the savior of the world.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 64 a fire broke out at the Circus Maximus in Rome. It spread quickly, devouring everything in its path. Fanned by the wind, it raged for more than five days and devastated a large area of the city before being brought under control. At the time, Nero was at Antium, his birthplace, some 33 miles (53 kilometers) to the south. He rushed to Rome to organize relief work. Because of his evil record, however, people put stock in the rumor that Nero had set the fire himself.<\/p>\n<p>Nero, in turn, found a scapegoat in the Christians, whom he charged with the crime. Many were persecuted. Perhaps the apostle Peter in his first letter was referring to the sufferings of Christians during the last few years of Nero’s reign (1 Pt 4:12). Nero may have been influenced by his second wife, Poppaea, to blame the Christians for the devastation of Rome. The church had increased in numbers and had become a movement. Tacitus alluded to the size of the church when he wrote that “a huge crowd was convicted not so much of arson as of hatred of the human race.”<\/p>\n<p>It is likely that Peter and Paul were executed during the Neronian persecution. Clement of Rome, an early church father, in his letter to the church at Corinth (written presumably in <span>AD<\/span> 95), referred to the heroes of faith “who lived nearest to our time,” namely Peter and Paul, who suffered martyrdom.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 66 a Jewish revolt broke out in Caesarea. Nero dispatched his general Vespasian to squelch the revolt, taking no interest himself in the affairs of state. He left Rome for a journey to Greece, leaving the responsibility of governing the empire to a Roman prefect, Helius. Because of the inescapable opposition he encountered from leading governors in France, Spain, and Africa on his return, Nero committed suicide in <span>AD<\/span> 68. He was the last emperor of the Caesarean line by blood or marriage.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SomeLaterEmperors\">Some Later Emperors<\/p>\n<h5>Galba (3 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 69, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 68–69)<\/h5>\n<p>After Nero’s death, the Praetorian Guard selected Serius Sulpicius Galba to become emperor. Galba was a popular and capable governor at various times in the provinces of France, Germany, Spain, and Africa. He was a less successful emperor and became increasingly unpopular with the army and the people for his frugality and dislike of ceremony. The German legions of the Roman army, who had only reluctantly recognized him as their commander-in-chief, withdrew their support in <span>AD<\/span> 69, proclaiming Aulus Vitellius emperor.<\/p>\n<p>When Galba failed to appoint one of his chief supporters, Marcus Salvius Otho, as his successor, he in essence signed his own death warrant. Otho gained the support of the Praetorian Guard, was proclaimed emperor, had Galba killed, and was confirmed by the Senate.<\/p>\n<h5>Vespasian (<span>AD<\/span> 9–79, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 69–79)<\/h5>\n<p>In the fall of <span>AD<\/span> 69, Vespasian found Rome ready for a period of stability, peace, and order. The son of a tax collector, he lived frugally, reestablished Rome’s finances, reorganized the armies, and reemphasized the outward forms of the old republic. According to Suetonius, no innocent party was ever punished while Vespasian was emperor. He grieved when convicted criminals were executed.<\/p>\n<p>Because of Nero’s financial mismanagement, Vespasian had to levy new taxes and increase existing taxes in order to meet his fiscal obligations. As a result he was slandered as avaricious, although he was generous in aiding underprivileged senators and impoverished ex-consuls. Vespasian improved a number of cities in the empire that had been devastated by fire or earthquake, and he promoted the arts and sciences. In Rome he built the Temple of Peace after the destruction of Jerusalem and the defeat of the Jews, erected a forum, restored the Capitol, and began construction of the Colosseum.<\/p>\n<p>During his 10-year reign, Vespasian established peace throughout the empire. His son Titus ended the war in Palestine, and other Roman generals suppressed a revolt in Germany. Public confidence was largely restored with the return to earlier standards of morality. Vespasian appointed his sons Titus and Domitian to succeed him.<\/p>\n<h5>Titus (<span>AD<\/span> 39–81, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 79–81)<\/h5>\n<p>Titus Flavius Vespasianus had served efficiently as a colonel in Germany and Britain. When the Jewish revolt broke out, he accompanied his father to Palestine. When Vespasian left for Rome five years later, Titus was appointed general of the Roman forces in Palestine. On September 26, <span>AD<\/span> 70, the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by fire, the citadel fell into the hands of the Romans, and countless Jews were killed. Titus returned to Rome with Jewish captives and spoils from the temple to celebrate his victory with his father. The Arch of Titus was erected in Rome, depicting his conquest of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Until Vespasian’s death, Titus was almost a co-ruler with his father. He served as Vespasian’s secretary, drafted edicts, and addressed the Senate in session. Titus was a talented person, especially in politics and music. He had fallen in love with Queen Bernice, King Agrippa II’s sister (see Acts 25–26) and allegedly had promised to marry her, but moral integrity prevented him when rumor reached him of an incestuous relationship with her brother.<\/p>\n<p>During Titus’s brief reign as emperor (<span>AD<\/span> 79–81), a series of catastrophes occurred: Mt Vesuvius in southern Italy erupted and buried the towns of Pompeii, Stabiae, and Herculaneum (August, <span>AD<\/span> 79); a fire raged for three days and nights in Rome (<span>AD<\/span> 80); and a plague spread throughout the imperial city. Suetonius wrote that during those disasters Titus cared for the people with a love resembling the deep love of a father for his children. When Titus died unexpectedly, his death caused universal mourning; he was eulogized by senators and common people alike.<\/p>\n<h5>Domitian (<span>AD<\/span> 51–96, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 81–96)<\/h5>\n<p>During Titus’s rule, his brother Domitian expressed bitterness at having to take second place, openly coveted power, and conspired to seize command of the armed forces. He secretly rejoiced over Titus’s sudden death and tried to slight his older brother’s reputation. As it turned out, Domitian proved to be a capable administrator: he restored the fire-gutted Capitol and built a temple to Jupiter, the Flavian Temple, a forum, a stadium, a concert hall, and an artificial lake for sea battles. He instituted the Capitoline Festival, promoted the arts and sciences, and maintained the public libraries.<\/p>\n<p>After the custom of earlier emperors Domitian proclaimed himself divine and had his subjects call him “Lord God.” The Senate, however, never officially deified him. Throughout his reign they resented and often opposed the power he exercised by prerogative. Domitian did not hesitate to persecute senators who made their objections known. In order to protect himself, he sought the army’s support by periodically increasing their pay. He collected additional taxes and often resorted to extortion. Jewish people were especially affected by his taxation. In the last years of Domitian’s reign, religious persecution was revived.<\/p>\n<p>The early Christian writers Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Eusebius mention the persecution of Christians during Domitian’s administration. Domitian appears to have been a relentless persecutor, second only to Nero. He even put members of his own family to death; his wife, Domitia, feared for her life because of her alleged affiliation with Christianity. With friends and freedmen, she plotted her husband’s assassination.<\/p>\n<p>After ruling the empire for 15 years, Domitian was murdered. Mourned by none, except perhaps his well-paid army, he left in the wake of his reign a bitter memory of oppression.<\/p>\n<h5>Trajan (<span>AD<\/span> 53–117, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 98–117)<\/h5>\n<p>Trajan was born Marcus Trajanus of Roman parents in Italica, Spain. His father was a soldier who was promoted to governor of an eastern province in Spain. Trajan, trained to be a military commander, proved himself in campaigns in Spain, Syria, and Germany. In <span>AD<\/span> 97, Emperor Nerva adopted him as his son and heir. Upon Nerva’s death the following year, Trajan was named emperor.<\/p>\n<p>A powerful military leader, Trajan expanded the Roman Empire by many conquests in Dacia (now part of Romania and Hungary), Arabia, and Parthia (now part of Iran). He established new cities, including Thamugadi in what is now Algeria. He also oversaw many building programs, including bridges across the Danube River in Dacia and Tagus River in Spain, and a harbor at the port of Rome. According to the writings of Pliny (see <em>Letters<\/em> 10.96), we know that Trajan instigated persecutions against Christians because their worship of Jesus threatened to exterminate the traditional forms of Roman worship. The Christians’ refusal to invoke the Roman gods and make offerings to the emperor’s statue was considered a treasonous act because it undermined the empire’s security.<\/p>\n<h5>Diocletian (<span>AD<\/span> 245–313, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 284–305)<\/h5>\n<p>Born to parents of humble means in Dalmatia (now part of Yugoslavia), Diocles changed his name to Diocletian when he became emperor. As a young man he joined the army and rose in rank, becoming commander of the imperial guard. When the emperor Numerian was murdered, Diocles’ troops proclaimed him the new ruler. Numerian’s brother, Carinus, was killed by his own troops when he sought the throne, and the way was clear for Diocles to assume control unopposed.<\/p>\n<p>Diocletian, an able organizer and administrator, used his skills to enact many structural reforms in the Roman Empire, including the establishment of the tetrarchy (293), a new imperial system in which four rulers shared power. His other reforms affected military, administrative, and economic areas. As a result of such reorganization, Diocletian created an efficient bureaucracy. Nevertheless, Rome declined as a political power center, and the Senate was further subordinated to the tetrarchy.<\/p>\n<p>A persecution of Christians began during Diocletian’s reign in 303, which was aimed at destroying church buildings and copies of the NT Scriptures. Among the tetrarchs, Galerius was the most active in carrying out the persecution. Because persecution continued under Galerius after Diocletian’s abdication, some scholars maintain that Diocletian was not responsible for the policy. Diocletian retired to a villa at Split in his native Dalmatia, avoiding public association with the new administration’s superstitious and violent policies.<\/p>\n<h5>Constantine the Great (<span>AD<\/span> 272 or 273–337, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 306–337)<\/h5>\n<p>Constantine’s parents were Constantius Chlorus, the Western co-emperor of the Roman Empire, and Helena, a concubine. When his father died in England in 306, Constantine was proclaimed emperor by the troops and grudgingly accepted by Galerius, the Eastern emperor. The government of the empire was thrown into turmoil, and within two years five men had claimed to be emperor.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death in 311, Galerius, the senior co-emperor, issued an edict of toleration that ended the persecution of Christians. With Galerius gone, Constantine and Licinius (who had become his co-emperor) allied themselves against Maxentius and Maximin Daia. In 312 Constantine defeated and killed Maxentius in a battle at the Mulvian Bridge near Rome. Maximin Daia fell to Licinius in the next year. An uneasy peace between Constantine and Licinius was maintained until 323, when Constantine crossed into Licinius’s territory while chasing out Gothic invaders. Battles at Adrianople and Chrysopolis in the next year decided the matter and left Constantine the sole emperor.<\/p>\n<p>One of his most significant political moves was the founding of the city of Constantinople, dedicated in 330 on the site of Byzantium. Its location on the Strait of Bosporus was ideal from a military standpoint since it gave access to both the Rhine-Danube and Persian fronts. Constantine continued a reorganization of government started by Diocletian (reigned 284-305) and reformed the currency. He also allowed barbarians to settle within the empire in order to use them in the army.<\/p>\n<p>Constantine is most remembered for his religious policies. The nature of his own religious beliefs has been disputed. From the first he was tolerant of Christians in his own realm. His preference for Christianity was demonstrated just before the battle at the Mulvian Bridge. According to one account, in a dream before the battle Constantine saw a vision of a monogram composed of the first two Greek letters of the name of “Christ.” The next day he had his soldiers inscribe that monogram on their shields. Another story says that, while marching one day, he and his army saw the image of a cross appear before the sun with the words “In this sign conquer.” During the winter of 312–13, he wrote to an officer in North Africa instructing him to supply money to the bishop of Carthage in order to pay expenses of the clergy. When he and Licinius met in Milan in 313, they issued an edict granting all persons the freedom to follow whichever religion they wished. His Christian sentiments also resulted in laws allowing bishops to decide civil lawsuits, banning any branding on the face (because it marred the image of God), closing law courts and workshops on Sunday, and banning gladiatorial games. Though he favored Christianity, Constantine was also tolerant of paganism and, as late as 324, pagan themes were engraved on his coins. With Christians such a minority in the empire, Constantine felt he could not risk offending the pagan majority.<\/p>\n<p>Constantine took an active role in church controversies. When Caecilian was challenged as bishop of Carthage (313) by the Donatists (separatists in the African church), Constantine instructed the bishops of Rome to summon a commission to hear the case. Since the Donatists were not content with the results of that commission, Constantine himself eventually heard the case, and in 316 he declared Caecilian to be the rightful bishop. Constantine also summoned the Council of Nicaea in 325, which ruled against Arianism (a heresy that denied that Christ as the Son of God was coeternal with the Father). It was the emperor’s edict that gave legal force to the Nicaean decision.<\/p>\n<p>One serious scandal marred Constantine’s reign. In 326 he had his son Crispus and his own wife, Faustus, executed on charges of adultery. Constantine was succeeded by his three other sons (Constans, Constantius, Constantine II), after being baptized a Christian on his deathbed (according to legend).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Rome, City of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CAESARS, The<\/h3>\n<p>Succession of Roman emperors. The name Caesar, which has derivatives in the German Kaiser, Dutch Keizer, and Russian Czar, goes back to the family name of Julius Caesar (100–44 <span>BC<\/span>), which his successors took to themselves. Luke’s Gospel mentions Caesar Augustus (Lk 2:1) and Tiberius Caesar (Lk 3:1). In the book of Acts the title “Caesar” is used to refer to Nero (Acts 25:11-12, 21; 26:32; 27:24; 28:19). During NT times, 12 Caesars reigned, 6 of them actually of the Caesarean lineage.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EmperorsofCaesarsLineage\">Emperors of Caesar’s Lineage<\/p>\n<h5>Julius Caesar (100–44 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/h5>\n<p>Julius had imperial powers but never held the title of emperor. Rome had been a republic (really an aristocracy) for almost 500 years. Its citizens hated the idea of a monarch, a position Julius Caesar judiciously declined, accepting a republican office but ruling as virtual dictator. The republic was dead in practice if not in principle. Vainly hoping to revive it and fearing Caesar’s imperial ambitions, a group of republicans conspired to assassinate him. Caesar was murdered on March 15 (the “ides of March”), 44 <span>BC<\/span>, as he entered the Roman Senate. Although the conspiracy succeeded, its purpose failed. In the civil war that followed, Caesar’s grand-nephew Octavian emerged as victor and in 31 <span>BC<\/span> became the first Roman emperor.<\/p>\n<h5>Augustus (63 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14, reigned 31 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14)<\/h5>\n<p>Gaius Octavianus (Octavian) was the grandson of Julia, Julius Caesar’s sister. He was 18 and studying in Greece when his great-uncle was assassinated. Caesar’s will, which adopted him as son and made him heir, brought him into the resulting power struggle.<\/p>\n<p>Within a year and a half, a trio consisting of Antony, Lepidus, and Octavian was confirmed in power. The following year, in a battle at Philippi (in Macedonia, now Greece), Octavian defeated both Cassius and Brutus, the chief conspirators against Caesar. Antony took command of the eastern provinces (which included Greece and Egypt), Octavian led his forces back to Italy, and Lepidus assumed jurisdiction over Gaul and western North Africa. Lepidus, however, was forced into retirement, and the area he controlled fell to Octavian. Thus Octavian and Antony, who had clashed even before their alliance, became rivals again. In the battle of Actium (31 <span>BC<\/span>), Octavian defeated Antony to become sole ruler of the Roman world and its first emperor.<\/p>\n<p>Octavian did not possess the military brilliance of his great-uncle, but he had a talent for ending strife and maintaining peace, which immediately gained him the support of the people. During his reign Roman culture enjoyed a golden age, particularly in architecture and literature. Augustus founded the Praetorian Guard, the emperor’s private honor corps of 9,000 soldiers. Originally intended to secure the emperor’s position, it later became so influential that it could independently depose an emperor or elect a new one without Senate confirmation.<\/p>\n<p>The title Augustus <em>(Augoustos),<\/em> meaning “exalted one,” was given to Octavian in 27 <span>BC<\/span>. The title reflects the practice of emperor worship that had been partly initiated in the reign of Julius Caesar, who declared himself to be “the unconquered god” and “the father of the fatherland.” Augustus continued the cult, although at first he declared that he should be worshiped only in association with the goddess Roma. Later, however, Augustus’s name became equated with Rome, and the emperor was regarded as the savior of the world. A temple to Augustus was built in Athens, and even Herod the Great built temples in his honor.<\/p>\n<p>When Augustus became emperor, he devoted himself to reorganizing his empire. Because of the chaos that had prevailed in the provinces, he took it upon himself to restructure economic and financial policies.<\/p>\n<p>Though Caesar Augustus is mentioned only once in the NT, he nevertheless is known to every reader of the Bible because of the census he decreed in all the provinces just before the birth of Jesus (Lk 2:1). Little information is available about that census, but Luke wrote that the first census was held when Jesus was born. The second was conducted in <span>AD<\/span> 6 and resulted in an uprising instigated by Judas of Galilee (Acts 5:37).<\/p>\n<p>During the time of Augustus’s reign, Herod the Great gained the emperor’s trust and was allowed to rule the Jews without Roman interference. In appreciation Herod rebuilt the old city of Samaria and renamed it Sebaste to honor Augustus. Caesarea on the Mediterranean coast of Palestine was also named in his honor.<\/p>\n<p>Conflicts between Herod and his sons were settled by Augustus in 12 <span>BC<\/span>. When dispute between father and sons arose again, however, Augustus ordered that it be settled in a Roman court, which ruled in 7 <span>BC<\/span> that two of them, Alexander and Aristobulus, be executed. In 4 <span>BC<\/span>, Augustus permitted the execution of Herod’s son Antipater.<\/p>\n<p>In Herod’s last will and testament, three of his sons (Archelaus, Antipas, and Philip) were appointed to rule his kingdom. Augustus’s approval of those appointments was necessary. Archelaus made a personal visit to Rome immediately after the death of his father to request possible changes in his status. Likewise, Antipas journeyed to Rome to see whether Augustus might be willing to grant him royal status as well. While the two of them sought separate audiences with the emperor, a delegation representing the people of Judea appeared before Augustus with the request that the Herodian rule—which was never very popular—be terminated. At the same time riots in Judea had to be suppressed by Roman legions sent from Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Augustus compromised. He converted Herod’s old kingdom to a Roman province and refused kingship to all of Herod’s sons. Otherwise he kept to the provisions of Herod’s testament: Archelaus became ethnarch (overlord) of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea (half of the new province); Antipas became tetrarch of Galilee and Perea (one quarter of the province); Philip became tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis (Lk 3:1; an area east of Galilee—the final quarter of the province). Because Archelaus was unable to rule effectively, he was deposed by the emperor in <span>AD<\/span> 6 and banished to Vienne in southern France.<\/p>\n<p>Augustus died in <span>AD<\/span> 14 after a brief illness, leaving the empire to his appointed successor, Tiberius.<\/p>\n<h5>Tiberius (42 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 37, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 14–37)<\/h5>\n<p>Tiberius Claudius Nero became Octavian’s stepson at the age of four, when his mother, Livia, divorced his father to marry the future emperor. Tiberius was made Augustus’s co-regent in <span>AD<\/span> 13 and succeeded him the following year. When he became emperor, he changed his name to Tiberius Caesar Augustus.<\/p>\n<p>Tiberius did not have an easy life. His stepfather had forced an unhappy marriage upon him. The Roman Senate often opposed him. In <span>AD<\/span> 27 Tiberius left Rome for the island of Capri, leaving the task of governing the empire in the hands of Sejanus, a Roman prefect (high-ranking official). During the next five years, Sejanus secretly tried to depose the emperor and seize power for himself. His conspiracy almost succeeded, but Tiberius eventually had him executed. Despite this, Tiberius’s administration was characterized by wisdom, intelligence, prudence, and duty. He continued his predecessor’s policy of striving for peace and security.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 26, presumably before going into semiretirement, Tiberius appointed Pontius Pilate as governor of Judea. Directly responsible to the emperor, Pilate could be immediately removed from office if word of Jewish disturbances or complaints reached Tiberius. Pilate’s capitulation to the Jewish authorities during the trial of Jesus can be best understood in view of this. The Jews accused Jesus of claiming to be king, implying a rivalry with the emperor. When Pilate judged Christ innocent of the charge and sought to release him (Jn 18:33-38), the Jews insisted he could not do so and still be a friend of Caesar (19:12). If he released Jesus, they insinuated, he would risk losing the emperor’s favor. Because of crimes committed at his command against the Jews, Pilate knew they might carry out their threat, resulting in his banishment. So, surrendering to their demands, he condemned Jesus to death by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Tiberius Caesar is mentioned only once in the NT. The Gospel of Luke states that John the Baptist began his ministry in the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar’s reign, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea (Lk 3:1). Whether that date was calculated from Tiberius’s actual accession or from the time of his co-regency is difficult to determine.<\/p>\n<p>Tiberius was a strangely humble emperor. At his own request he was never officially recognized as a god (a sort of honorary title that the Senate had given to his predecessors). Interest in emperor worship had waned, and Tiberius intended to confine deity to his two predecessors. He also stopped the practice of naming months of the year after emperors; thus there is a July for Julius, an August for Augustus, but no Tiber for Tiberius. Plagued by domestic and political problems all his life, Tiberius died a tired and dejected old man. In fact, he was an excellent administrator.<\/p>\n<h5>Caligula (<span>AD<\/span> 12–41, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 37–41)<\/h5>\n<p>At the death of Tiberius, Gaius Julius Caesar became emperor at the age of 25. He was the son of an influential general, Germanicus; Augustus had forced Tiberius to adopt Gaius and make him his heir. As a child, Gaius had accompanied Germanicus on his military duties along the Rhine River in Germany. The soldiers nicknamed him Caligula (“Little Boot”) for his military attire. The name stuck.<\/p>\n<p>To gain popularity with the Romans, Caligula began his reign by pardoning people and recalling exiles. He squandered the money of the Roman treasury, however, and was forced to levy new taxes. His popularity was short-lived.<\/p>\n<p>Six months after assuming office, Caligula suffered a serious illness that left him insane. On one occasion, for example, he appointed his horse as consul (chief magistrate). He insulted many people, banished others on whim, and had others murdered without provocation. When he felt that he had been insulted by the Jews in Jamnia, a Judean town near the Mediterranean coast, he ordered a statue of himself placed in the temple at Jerusalem in revenge. The Jews were outraged, and a full-scale revolt was avoided only by the prudence of the governor of Syria, Petronius, who delayed carrying out the order. Not long afterward the emperor was assassinated by one of the many men he had insulted.<\/p>\n<p>It was Caligula who appointed Herod Agrippa I (Herod in Acts 12) king over a tetrarchy northeast of Galilee—one of the first acts he performed as emperor, according to the Jewish historian Josephus. The two had become close friends before either had come to power, while Agrippa was living in Rome, where even as king he later spent much of his time. But unlike Caligula, Agrippa was a capable and popular ruler. Both king and emperor, in the tradition of many eastern monarchs, fancied themselves gods. Caligula, in fact, revived the notion in Rome of the emperor’s deity and madly proclaimed himself equal to Jupiter. The Senate, however, refrained from officially recognizing that status.<\/p>\n<h5>Claudius (10 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 54, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 41–54)<\/h5>\n<p>Tiberius Claudius Germanicus was born in Lyon (France). He was Tiberius’s nephew and a grandson of Livia, the wife of Augustus. In <span>AD<\/span> 37 he was appointed consul by Caligula. After Caligula’s death Claudius was proclaimed emperor by the Praetorian Guard, and the Senate approved the choice.<\/p>\n<p>When Claudius became emperor, he faced the task of healing the broken relationships caused by Caligula’s madness. He ended the persecution of Jews in the city of Alexandria. Josephus recorded an edict that Claudius sent to Egypt, which read, in part: “Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, high priest and tribune of the people, ordains thus. . . . I will, therefore, that the nation of the Jews be not deprived of their rights and privileges on account of the madness of Gaius; but that those rights and privileges that they formerly enjoyed, be preserved to them, and that they may continue in their own customs.”<\/p>\n<p>That change of policy reflected the emperor’s friendship with Herod Agrippa, who had played an influential role in Claudius’s succession as emperor. Claudius, in turn, added Judea and Samaria to Agrippa’s kingdom, giving him the dominion that once belonged to his grandfather, Herod the Great. He also promoted him to consular rank. Further, having complete trust in Agrippa’s abilities, Claudius removed Judea from Roman provincial rule.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa’s rule, however, was of short duration. In order to please the Jews, he had the apostle James, Zebedee’s son, killed. He also had the apostle Peter imprisoned, planning to have him executed after the Passover feast in the spring of <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:1-5). Peter escaped. During the summer of that year, Agrippa, who was wearing a glistening garment made of silver thread, gave a speech from his throne. The people acclaimed him as a god (v 22), and immediately he was struck down by an angel of the Lord. Five days later he died.<\/p>\n<p>The emperor wished to stay on the right side of the Jewish people, yet five years after the death of Agrippa, Claudius issued an edict expelling all Jews from Rome. Luke related that Aquila and Priscilla were among those who had been ordered to leave the imperial city (Acts 18:2). The Roman biographer and historian Suetonius wrote that “because the Jews of Rome were indulging in constant riots at the instigation of Chrestus he [Claudius] expelled them from the city.” The writer could easily have been uncertain of the spelling, because Chrestus, a common slave name, was pronounced virtually the same as Christus. It appears that Suetonius sought to convey to his readers that Chrestus was the founder of a movement (presumably Christianity).<\/p>\n<p>Because of mismanagement by Caligula, the supply of grain for food was at an all-time low when Claudius began to reign (cf. Acts 11:28). Josephus related that during Claudius’s administration, famine plagued Judea, Samaria, and Galilee. To alleviate the famine in Jerusalem, Helena, mother of the king of Adiabene, bought grain from Egypt and dried figs from Cyprus. That must have taken place in <span>AD<\/span> 45–46. Various ancient historians, including Tacitus, Suetonius, and Eusebius, reported that on frequent occasions famines prevailed in Rome and elsewhere. Repeatedly, harvests were minimal and distribution of food supplies was poor.<\/p>\n<p>Claudius’s family life and reputation were marred by intrigue. His immoral third wife, Messalina, was eventually put to death. Causing a slight scandal, he married his niece Agrippina, who had a son by a former marriage. She wanted her son Nero to be emperor, but Britannicus, Messalina’s son, stood first in line. In <span>AD<\/span> 54, when Claudius decided that Britannicus should succeed him, Agrippina poisoned her husband and made Nero emperor. The Senate officially deified Claudius, making him the third emperor to receive that honor.<\/p>\n<h5>Nero (<span>AD<\/span> 37–68, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 54–68)<\/h5>\n<p>Nero was born Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus. His father was a senator and consul who died when Nero was still a boy. His mother, Agrippina, Germanicus’s daughter, was reputed to be one of the wealthiest and most beautiful women in Rome. When she married the emperor, her son received the name Nero Claudius Caesar Germanicus at his adoption by Claudius.<\/p>\n<p>Nero was at first dominated by his proud mother, who wished to reign alongside her son. In those years Rome was a hotbed of political intrigue, murder plots, and assassinations. During the first five years of his reign, Nero had Britannicus and Agrippina eliminated in quick succession. A few years later he banished his wife, Octavia, and had her killed.<\/p>\n<p>Ironically, the church at Rome flourished at that same time. The last chapter of the apostle Paul’s Letter to the Romans, written from Corinth in <span>AD<\/span> 57, contains a long and impressive list of names of personal acquaintances—especially impressive because Paul had never been in Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nero had reigned more than five years when Paul, imprisoned at Caesarea, appealed to Caesar (Acts 25:11). Motives for the appeal may have been a prison release for Paul and an opportunity to seek legal recognition of Christianity. Paul’s appeal to Caesar, however, does not necessarily mean that he was judged by Nero. The emperor had made it known at the beginning of his reign that he would not be a judge. Instead, he appointed prefects of the Praetorian Guard to judge cases for him. In the early part of <span>AD<\/span> 62, Nero changed that rule and judged a case himself. Therefore, whether Paul stood before Nero or before one of the prefects is difficult to determine. If prosecutors failed to appear, Paul’s case may not have come before the judge at all. According to Philippians 1:7-14, Paul was still expecting a trial at the time of his writing that letter.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 62 Nero’s adviser Afranius Burrus died. Burrus had been a prefect of the Praetorian Guard and, together with an able senator, Seneca, had ruled the empire effectively while Nero spent his time on pleasure. After Burrus’s death (Seneca was forced to commit suicide three years later), Nero began to indulge his whims unchecked. His greedy advisers, who sought self-advancement at the expense of the state, caused a severe financial crisis. Nero was also unbalanced in regarding himself the savior of the world.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 64 a fire broke out at the Circus Maximus in Rome. It spread quickly, devouring everything in its path. Fanned by the wind, it raged for more than five days and devastated a large area of the city before being brought under control. At the time, Nero was at Antium, his birthplace, some 33 miles (53 kilometers) to the south. He rushed to Rome to organize relief work. Because of his evil record, however, people put stock in the rumor that Nero had set the fire himself.<\/p>\n<p>Nero, in turn, found a scapegoat in the Christians, whom he charged with the crime. Many were persecuted. Perhaps the apostle Peter in his first letter was referring to the sufferings of Christians during the last few years of Nero’s reign (1 Pt 4:12). Nero may have been influenced by his second wife, Poppaea, to blame the Christians for the devastation of Rome. The church had increased in numbers and had become a movement. Tacitus alluded to the size of the church when he wrote that “a huge crowd was convicted not so much of arson as of hatred of the human race.”<\/p>\n<p>It is likely that Peter and Paul were executed during the Neronian persecution. Clement of Rome, an early church father, in his letter to the church at Corinth (written presumably in <span>AD<\/span> 95), referred to the heroes of faith “who lived nearest to our time,” namely Peter and Paul, who suffered martyrdom.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 66 a Jewish revolt broke out in Caesarea. Nero dispatched his general Vespasian to squelch the revolt, taking no interest himself in the affairs of state. He left Rome for a journey to Greece, leaving the responsibility of governing the empire to a Roman prefect, Helius. Because of the inescapable opposition he encountered from leading governors in France, Spain, and Africa on his return, Nero committed suicide in <span>AD<\/span> 68. He was the last emperor of the Caesarean line by blood or marriage.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SomeLaterEmperors\">Some Later Emperors<\/p>\n<h5>Galba (3 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 69, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 68–69)<\/h5>\n<p>After Nero’s death, the Praetorian Guard selected Serius Sulpicius Galba to become emperor. Galba was a popular and capable governor at various times in the provinces of France, Germany, Spain, and Africa. He was a less successful emperor and became increasingly unpopular with the army and the people for his frugality and dislike of ceremony. The German legions of the Roman army, who had only reluctantly recognized him as their commander-in-chief, withdrew their support in <span>AD<\/span> 69, proclaiming Aulus Vitellius emperor.<\/p>\n<p>When Galba failed to appoint one of his chief supporters, Marcus Salvius Otho, as his successor, he in essence signed his own death warrant. Otho gained the support of the Praetorian Guard, was proclaimed emperor, had Galba killed, and was confirmed by the Senate.<\/p>\n<h5>Vespasian (<span>AD<\/span> 9–79, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 69–79)<\/h5>\n<p>In the fall of <span>AD<\/span> 69, Vespasian found Rome ready for a period of stability, peace, and order. The son of a tax collector, he lived frugally, reestablished Rome’s finances, reorganized the armies, and reemphasized the outward forms of the old republic. According to Suetonius, no innocent party was ever punished while Vespasian was emperor. He grieved when convicted criminals were executed.<\/p>\n<p>Because of Nero’s financial mismanagement, Vespasian had to levy new taxes and increase existing taxes in order to meet his fiscal obligations. As a result he was slandered as avaricious, although he was generous in aiding underprivileged senators and impoverished ex-consuls. Vespasian improved a number of cities in the empire that had been devastated by fire or earthquake, and he promoted the arts and sciences. In Rome he built the Temple of Peace after the destruction of Jerusalem and the defeat of the Jews, erected a forum, restored the Capitol, and began construction of the Colosseum.<\/p>\n<p>During his 10-year reign, Vespasian established peace throughout the empire. His son Titus ended the war in Palestine, and other Roman generals suppressed a revolt in Germany. Public confidence was largely restored with the return to earlier standards of morality. Vespasian appointed his sons Titus and Domitian to succeed him.<\/p>\n<h5>Titus (<span>AD<\/span> 39–81, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 79–81)<\/h5>\n<p>Titus Flavius Vespasianus had served efficiently as a colonel in Germany and Britain. When the Jewish revolt broke out, he accompanied his father to Palestine. When Vespasian left for Rome five years later, Titus was appointed general of the Roman forces in Palestine. On September 26, <span>AD<\/span> 70, the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by fire, the citadel fell into the hands of the Romans, and countless Jews were killed. Titus returned to Rome with Jewish captives and spoils from the temple to celebrate his victory with his father. The Arch of Titus was erected in Rome, depicting his conquest of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Until Vespasian’s death, Titus was almost a co-ruler with his father. He served as Vespasian’s secretary, drafted edicts, and addressed the Senate in session. Titus was a talented person, especially in politics and music. He had fallen in love with Queen Bernice, King Agrippa II’s sister (see Acts 25–26) and allegedly had promised to marry her, but moral integrity prevented him when rumor reached him of an incestuous relationship with her brother.<\/p>\n<p>During Titus’s brief reign as emperor (<span>AD<\/span> 79–81), a series of catastrophes occurred: Mt Vesuvius in southern Italy erupted and buried the towns of Pompeii, Stabiae, and Herculaneum (August, <span>AD<\/span> 79); a fire raged for three days and nights in Rome (<span>AD<\/span> 80); and a plague spread throughout the imperial city. Suetonius wrote that during those disasters Titus cared for the people with a love resembling the deep love of a father for his children. When Titus died unexpectedly, his death caused universal mourning; he was eulogized by senators and common people alike.<\/p>\n<h5>Domitian (<span>AD<\/span> 51–96, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 81–96)<\/h5>\n<p>During Titus’s rule, his brother Domitian expressed bitterness at having to take second place, openly coveted power, and conspired to seize command of the armed forces. He secretly rejoiced over Titus’s sudden death and tried to slight his older brother’s reputation. As it turned out, Domitian proved to be a capable administrator: he restored the fire-gutted Capitol and built a temple to Jupiter, the Flavian Temple, a forum, a stadium, a concert hall, and an artificial lake for sea battles. He instituted the Capitoline Festival, promoted the arts and sciences, and maintained the public libraries.<\/p>\n<p>After the custom of earlier emperors Domitian proclaimed himself divine and had his subjects call him “Lord God.” The Senate, however, never officially deified him. Throughout his reign they resented and often opposed the power he exercised by prerogative. Domitian did not hesitate to persecute senators who made their objections known. In order to protect himself, he sought the army’s support by periodically increasing their pay. He collected additional taxes and often resorted to extortion. Jewish people were especially affected by his taxation. In the last years of Domitian’s reign, religious persecution was revived.<\/p>\n<p>The early Christian writers Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Eusebius mention the persecution of Christians during Domitian’s administration. Domitian appears to have been a relentless persecutor, second only to Nero. He even put members of his own family to death; his wife, Domitia, feared for her life because of her alleged affiliation with Christianity. With friends and freedmen, she plotted her husband’s assassination.<\/p>\n<p>After ruling the empire for 15 years, Domitian was murdered. Mourned by none, except perhaps his well-paid army, he left in the wake of his reign a bitter memory of oppression.<\/p>\n<h5>Trajan (<span>AD<\/span> 53–117, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 98–117)<\/h5>\n<p>Trajan was born Marcus Trajanus of Roman parents in Italica, Spain. His father was a soldier who was promoted to governor of an eastern province in Spain. Trajan, trained to be a military commander, proved himself in campaigns in Spain, Syria, and Germany. In <span>AD<\/span> 97, Emperor Nerva adopted him as his son and heir. Upon Nerva’s death the following year, Trajan was named emperor.<\/p>\n<p>A powerful military leader, Trajan expanded the Roman Empire by many conquests in Dacia (now part of Romania and Hungary), Arabia, and Parthia (now part of Iran). He established new cities, including Thamugadi in what is now Algeria. He also oversaw many building programs, including bridges across the Danube River in Dacia and Tagus River in Spain, and a harbor at the port of Rome. According to the writings of Pliny (see <em>Letters<\/em> 10.96), we know that Trajan instigated persecutions against Christians because their worship of Jesus threatened to exterminate the traditional forms of Roman worship. The Christians’ refusal to invoke the Roman gods and make offerings to the emperor’s statue was considered a treasonous act because it undermined the empire’s security.<\/p>\n<h5>Diocletian (<span>AD<\/span> 245–313, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 284–305)<\/h5>\n<p>Born to parents of humble means in Dalmatia (now part of Yugoslavia), Diocles changed his name to Diocletian when he became emperor. As a young man he joined the army and rose in rank, becoming commander of the imperial guard. When the emperor Numerian was murdered, Diocles’ troops proclaimed him the new ruler. Numerian’s brother, Carinus, was killed by his own troops when he sought the throne, and the way was clear for Diocles to assume control unopposed.<\/p>\n<p>Diocletian, an able organizer and administrator, used his skills to enact many structural reforms in the Roman Empire, including the establishment of the tetrarchy (293), a new imperial system in which four rulers shared power. His other reforms affected military, administrative, and economic areas. As a result of such reorganization, Diocletian created an efficient bureaucracy. Nevertheless, Rome declined as a political power center, and the Senate was further subordinated to the tetrarchy.<\/p>\n<p>A persecution of Christians began during Diocletian’s reign in 303, which was aimed at destroying church buildings and copies of the NT Scriptures. Among the tetrarchs, Galerius was the most active in carrying out the persecution. Because persecution continued under Galerius after Diocletian’s abdication, some scholars maintain that Diocletian was not responsible for the policy. Diocletian retired to a villa at Split in his native Dalmatia, avoiding public association with the new administration’s superstitious and violent policies.<\/p>\n<h5>Constantine the Great (<span>AD<\/span> 272 or 273–337, reigned <span>AD<\/span> 306–337)<\/h5>\n<p>Constantine’s parents were Constantius Chlorus, the Western co-emperor of the Roman Empire, and Helena, a concubine. When his father died in England in 306, Constantine was proclaimed emperor by the troops and grudgingly accepted by Galerius, the Eastern emperor. The government of the empire was thrown into turmoil, and within two years five men had claimed to be emperor.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death in 311, Galerius, the senior co-emperor, issued an edict of toleration that ended the persecution of Christians. With Galerius gone, Constantine and Licinius (who had become his co-emperor) allied themselves against Maxentius and Maximin Daia. In 312 Constantine defeated and killed Maxentius in a battle at the Mulvian Bridge near Rome. Maximin Daia fell to Licinius in the next year. An uneasy peace between Constantine and Licinius was maintained until 323, when Constantine crossed into Licinius’s territory while chasing out Gothic invaders. Battles at Adrianople and Chrysopolis in the next year decided the matter and left Constantine the sole emperor.<\/p>\n<p>One of his most significant political moves was the founding of the city of Constantinople, dedicated in 330 on the site of Byzantium. Its location on the Strait of Bosporus was ideal from a military standpoint since it gave access to both the Rhine-Danube and Persian fronts. Constantine continued a reorganization of government started by Diocletian (reigned 284-305) and reformed the currency. He also allowed barbarians to settle within the empire in order to use them in the army.<\/p>\n<p>Constantine is most remembered for his religious policies. The nature of his own religious beliefs has been disputed. From the first he was tolerant of Christians in his own realm. His preference for Christianity was demonstrated just before the battle at the Mulvian Bridge. According to one account, in a dream before the battle Constantine saw a vision of a monogram composed of the first two Greek letters of the name of “Christ.” The next day he had his soldiers inscribe that monogram on their shields. Another story says that, while marching one day, he and his army saw the image of a cross appear before the sun with the words “In this sign conquer.” During the winter of 312–13, he wrote to an officer in North Africa instructing him to supply money to the bishop of Carthage in order to pay expenses of the clergy. When he and Licinius met in Milan in 313, they issued an edict granting all persons the freedom to follow whichever religion they wished. His Christian sentiments also resulted in laws allowing bishops to decide civil lawsuits, banning any branding on the face (because it marred the image of God), closing law courts and workshops on Sunday, and banning gladiatorial games. Though he favored Christianity, Constantine was also tolerant of paganism and, as late as 324, pagan themes were engraved on his coins. With Christians such a minority in the empire, Constantine felt he could not risk offending the pagan majority.<\/p>\n<p>Constantine took an active role in church controversies. When Caecilian was challenged as bishop of Carthage (313) by the Donatists (separatists in the African church), Constantine instructed the bishops of Rome to summon a commission to hear the case. Since the Donatists were not content with the results of that commission, Constantine himself eventually heard the case, and in 316 he declared Caecilian to be the rightful bishop. Constantine also summoned the Council of Nicaea in 325, which ruled against Arianism (a heresy that denied that Christ as the Son of God was coeternal with the Father). It was the emperor’s edict that gave legal force to the Nicaean decision.<\/p>\n<p>One serious scandal marred Constantine’s reign. In 326 he had his son Crispus and his own wife, Faustus, executed on charges of adultery. Constantine was succeeded by his three other sons (Constans, Constantius, Constantine II), after being baptized a Christian on his deathbed (according to legend).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Rome, City of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CAESARS, The Succession of Roman emperors. The name Caesar, which has derivatives in the German Kaiser, Dutch Keizer, and Russian Czar, goes back to the family name of Julius Caesar (100–44 BC), which his successors took to themselves. Luke’s Gospel mentions Caesar Augustus (Lk 2:1) and Tiberius Caesar (Lk 3:1). In the book of Acts the title “Caesar” is used to refer to Nero (Acts 25:11-12, 21; 26:32; 27:24; 28:19). During NT times, 12 Caesars reigned, 6 of them actually of the Caesarean line...","summary_en":"CAESARS, The Succession of Roman emperors. The name Caesar, which has derivatives in the German Kaiser, Dutch Keizer, and Russian Czar, goes back to the family name of Julius Caesar (100–44 BC), which his successors took to themselves. Luke’s Gospel mentions Caesar Augustus (Lk 2:1) and Tiberius Caesar (Lk 3:1). In the book of Acts the title “Caesar” is used to refer to Nero (Acts 25:11-12, 21; 26:32; 27:24; 28:19). During NT times, 12 Caesars reigned, 6 of them actually of the Caesarean line...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19577,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20237,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56724,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:33","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:33","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:33<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em> was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • <em>Are you the king of the Jews?<\/em> To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head full of messianic notions and a band of well-armed followers.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:33<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em> was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • <em>Are you the king of the Jews?<\/em> To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head full of messianic notions and a band of well-armed followers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:33 Pilate was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • Are you the king of the Jews? To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head ful...","summary_en":"18:33 Pilate was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • Are you the king of the Jews? To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head ful...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84350,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:33","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:33","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:33<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em> was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • <em>Are you the king of the Jews?<\/em> To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head full of messianic notions and a band of well-armed followers.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:33<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em> was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • <em>Are you the king of the Jews?<\/em> To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head full of messianic notions and a band of well-armed followers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:33 Pilate was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • Are you the king of the Jews? To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head ful...","summary_en":"18:33 Pilate was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • Are you the king of the Jews? To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head ful...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111976,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:33","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:33","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:33<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em> was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • <em>Are you the king of the Jews?<\/em> To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head full of messianic notions and a band of well-armed followers.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:33<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em> was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • <em>Are you the king of the Jews?<\/em> To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head full of messianic notions and a band of well-armed followers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:33 Pilate was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • Are you the king of the Jews? To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head ful...","summary_en":"18:33 Pilate was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • Are you the king of the Jews? To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head ful...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139602,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:33","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:33","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:33<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em> was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • <em>Are you the king of the Jews?<\/em> To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head full of messianic notions and a band of well-armed followers.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:33<\/strong> <em>Pilate<\/em> was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • <em>Are you the king of the Jews?<\/em> To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head full of messianic notions and a band of well-armed followers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:33 Pilate was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • Are you the king of the Jews? To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head ful...","summary_en":"18:33 Pilate was personally responsible for capital crimes in which the interests and security of the Roman Empire were at stake, so he began his formal legal inquiry. • Are you the king of the Jews? To get the governor’s attention, Caiaphas had charged that Jesus had urged people not to pay their taxes to the Roman government and had claimed to be a king (Luke 23:2). To Pilate, Jesus might have been just another Jewish terrorist–revolutionary (see Luke 23:18-19; Acts 5:36-37) with a head ful...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"34":[{"id":56725,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:34","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:34-35<\/strong> Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his <em>question<\/em>. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:34-35<\/strong> Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his <em>question<\/em>. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:34-35 Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his question. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.","summary_en":"18:34-35 Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his question. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84351,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:34","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:34-35<\/strong> Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his <em>question<\/em>. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:34-35<\/strong> Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his <em>question<\/em>. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:34-35 Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his question. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.","summary_en":"18:34-35 Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his question. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111977,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:34","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:34-35<\/strong> Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his <em>question<\/em>. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:34-35<\/strong> Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his <em>question<\/em>. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:34-35 Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his question. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.","summary_en":"18:34-35 Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his question. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139603,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:34","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:34-35<\/strong> Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his <em>question<\/em>. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:34-35<\/strong> Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his <em>question<\/em>. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:34-35 Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his question. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.","summary_en":"18:34-35 Jesus’ reply forced the governor to show the origin of his question. The Temple leadership was behind these charges. Pilate only wanted to know if Jesus was a rebel who might threaten Roman interests.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"36":[{"id":4719,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","title_en":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19797,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jew","title_en":"Jew","content_ro":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","summary_en":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21815,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","title_en":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","content_ro":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","summary_en":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40440,"type":"picture","type_label":"Imagine","type_icon":"🖼️","type_color":"#ec4899","title_ro":"Papyrus Manuscript of John","title_en":"Papyrus Manuscript of John","content_ro":"<p><\/p>\n <p><strong>Papyrus Manuscript of John<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 18:36–19:7, Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 3523, late second century—P90<\/p>","content_en":"<p><\/p>\n <p><strong>Papyrus Manuscript of John<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 18:36–19:7, Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 3523, late second century—P90<\/p>","summary_ro":"Papyrus Manuscript of John John 18:36–19:7, Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 3523, late second century—P90","summary_en":"Papyrus Manuscript of John John 18:36–19:7, Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 3523, late second century—P90","source":"Pictures\/Pictures.xml","external_url":"..\/Pictures\/artfiles\/bibox90.jpg","has_map":false,"has_picture":true},{"id":56726,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:36","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:36","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:36-37<\/strong> Jesus was willing to accept the title of <em>king<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he made it clear that he did not govern an <em>earthly kingdom<\/em> that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is <em>not of this world<\/em>. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:36-37<\/strong> Jesus was willing to accept the title of <em>king<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he made it clear that he did not govern an <em>earthly kingdom<\/em> that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is <em>not of this world<\/em>. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:36-37 Jesus was willing to accept the title of king, but he made it clear that he did not govern an earthly kingdom that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is not of this world. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.","summary_en":"18:36-37 Jesus was willing to accept the title of king, but he made it clear that he did not govern an earthly kingdom that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is not of this world. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84352,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:36","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:36","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:36-37<\/strong> Jesus was willing to accept the title of <em>king<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he made it clear that he did not govern an <em>earthly kingdom<\/em> that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is <em>not of this world<\/em>. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:36-37<\/strong> Jesus was willing to accept the title of <em>king<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he made it clear that he did not govern an <em>earthly kingdom<\/em> that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is <em>not of this world<\/em>. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:36-37 Jesus was willing to accept the title of king, but he made it clear that he did not govern an earthly kingdom that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is not of this world. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.","summary_en":"18:36-37 Jesus was willing to accept the title of king, but he made it clear that he did not govern an earthly kingdom that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is not of this world. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111978,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:36","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:36","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:36-37<\/strong> Jesus was willing to accept the title of <em>king<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he made it clear that he did not govern an <em>earthly kingdom<\/em> that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is <em>not of this world<\/em>. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:36-37<\/strong> Jesus was willing to accept the title of <em>king<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he made it clear that he did not govern an <em>earthly kingdom<\/em> that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is <em>not of this world<\/em>. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:36-37 Jesus was willing to accept the title of king, but he made it clear that he did not govern an earthly kingdom that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is not of this world. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.","summary_en":"18:36-37 Jesus was willing to accept the title of king, but he made it clear that he did not govern an earthly kingdom that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is not of this world. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139604,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:36","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:36","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:36-37<\/strong> Jesus was willing to accept the title of <em>king<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he made it clear that he did not govern an <em>earthly kingdom<\/em> that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is <em>not of this world<\/em>. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:36-37<\/strong> Jesus was willing to accept the title of <em>king<\/em><em>,<\/em> but he made it clear that he did not govern an <em>earthly kingdom<\/em> that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is <em>not of this world<\/em>. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:36-37 Jesus was willing to accept the title of king, but he made it clear that he did not govern an earthly kingdom that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is not of this world. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.","summary_en":"18:36-37 Jesus was willing to accept the title of king, but he made it clear that he did not govern an earthly kingdom that might rival Rome. Jesus’ kingship is not of this world. Rather than being a political ruler, he rules through the devotion and obedience of his followers.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65960,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66767,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Old Realm and the New","title_en":"The Old Realm and the New","content_ro":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","summary_en":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93586,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94393,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Old Realm and the New","title_en":"The Old Realm and the New","content_ro":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","summary_en":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121212,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122019,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Old Realm and the New","title_en":"The Old Realm and the New","content_ro":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","summary_en":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148838,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149645,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Old Realm and the New","title_en":"The Old Realm and the New","content_ro":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","summary_en":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"37":[{"id":37739,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Truth","title_en":"Truth","content_ro":"<h3>TRUTH<\/h3>\n<p>That which is real and verifiable by experience.<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1:10-12), and witnessed to by the Holy Spirit (Jn 16:13). The OT teaching was never false, but it was shadowy and incomplete in comparison with the revealed truth of the NT. So Christ brought spiritual reality (Jn 1:17), and the Holy Spirit leads believers into the experience of all that is real in Christ (16:13).<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the truth because, being God, his words carry divine authority. They are truth and life (Jn 6:63). In addition, the life of Christ epitomized truthfulness and utter reliability. When people live in obedience to the truth, they themselves are true and reliable. Scripture calls upon people to “do the truth” (Jn 3:21, <span>kjv<\/span>). Those who have experienced God’s reality in Christ know, by experience, that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life (Jn 14:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TRUTH<\/h3>\n<p>That which is real and verifiable by experience.<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1:10-12), and witnessed to by the Holy Spirit (Jn 16:13). The OT teaching was never false, but it was shadowy and incomplete in comparison with the revealed truth of the NT. So Christ brought spiritual reality (Jn 1:17), and the Holy Spirit leads believers into the experience of all that is real in Christ (16:13).<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the truth because, being God, his words carry divine authority. They are truth and life (Jn 6:63). In addition, the life of Christ epitomized truthfulness and utter reliability. When people live in obedience to the truth, they themselves are true and reliable. Scripture calls upon people to “do the truth” (Jn 3:21, <span>kjv<\/span>). Those who have experienced God’s reality in Christ know, by experience, that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life (Jn 14:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TRUTH That which is real and verifiable by experience. In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1...","summary_en":"TRUTH That which is real and verifiable by experience. In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"38":[{"id":42306,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Pontius Pilate","title_en":"Pontius Pilate","content_ro":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","summary_en":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69932,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Pontius Pilate","title_en":"Pontius Pilate","content_ro":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","summary_en":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97558,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Pontius Pilate","title_en":"Pontius Pilate","content_ro":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","summary_en":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125184,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Pontius Pilate","title_en":"Pontius Pilate","content_ro":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pontius Pilate<\/h3>\n<p>Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in <span>AD<\/span> 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified.<\/p>\n<p>As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Mark 15:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Pilate was sometimes abusive as governor. He appropriated Temple funds to construct a thirty-five-mile aqueduct for Jerusalem, provoking a major protest. In response, Pilate had soldiers infiltrate the crowds in disguise and beat the offenders to death with clubs (Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.9.4; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.2). Another time, Pilate murdered some Galileans “as they were offering sacrifices at the Temple” (Luke 13:1); this incident might have estranged him from the Galilean ruler Herod Antipas. Pilate also tried to bring images of Caesar into Jerusalem for worship. Later (<span>AD<\/span> 36), Pilate slaughtered pilgrims who followed a Samaritan false prophet, an event that led to his dismissal by the emperor Tiberius in the same year.<\/p>\n<p>Each Gospel records Pilate’s role in the death of Jesus (Matt 27:11-26; Mark 15:1:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28–19:16; see also Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13). After interrogating Jesus, he was convinced that Jesus had done nothing deserving of death, so he tried to return the case to the Jewish authorities. When they resisted, he tried to pass Jesus to Herod Antipas for judgment—but he, too, refused the case. Pilate finally tried appealing to a traditional Roman custom of freeing a prisoner on Passover. Meanwhile, his wife had been deeply troubled by a dream about “that innocent man” (Matt 27:19). But the clamor of the crowd became threatening, and the Jewish leaders began insinuating that Pilate was not taking Jesus’ threat to Rome seriously. Pilate yielded to Jewish pressure. He ordered that Jesus be whipped and then crucified, with the title “King of the Jews” posted on a sign over his head—but only after strenuously objecting and declaring himself to be innocent of the guilt of such an unjust death (Matt 27:18-25; Mark 15:14; Luke 23:4, 13-23; John 18:38); 19:4-16. Pilate’s attitude toward Jesus stands as a testimony that Jesus posed no threat to the Roman government but only to the Jewish leadership. This may have been a helpful point for later Christians who were portrayed as a threat to Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus’ death, Pilate gave special permission to Joseph of Arimathea to take the body of Jesus from the cross and bury it (Matt 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). He also gave permission to the Jewish authorities to seal the tomb to make sure no one would steal the body or make false claims about Jesus coming back to life (Matt 27:62-66).<\/p>\n<p>Little is known of Pilate after his dismissal in <span>AD<\/span> 36; Eusebius reports that Pilate committed suicide during the reign of Caligula, <span>AD<\/span> 37–41 (Eusebius, <em>Church History<\/em> 2.7).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 27:2, 11-26, 57-58, 62-65; Mark 15:1-15, 43-45; Luke 3:1; 13:1; 23:1-25, 52; 18:28–19:16; 19:31, 38; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim 6:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","summary_en":"Pontius Pilate Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26 to 36, including the time of Jesus’ death in AD 30 or 33. Pilate gave the official order for Jesus to be crucified. As the governor of Judea, Pilate was in control of all the Roman occupation forces as well as the Temple and its funds. He was the only one who had the authority to execute criminals (see John 18:31), so the Jewish authorities were compelled to bring charges before Pilate in order to have Jesus executed (Ma...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56727,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:38","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:38","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:38-39<\/strong> <em>What is truth?<\/em> Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: <em>not guilty<\/em>. Although he referred to Jesus as <em>“King of the Jews”<\/em> (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:38-39<\/strong> <em>What is truth?<\/em> Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: <em>not guilty<\/em>. Although he referred to Jesus as <em>“King of the Jews”<\/em> (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:38-39 What is truth? Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: not guilty. Although he referred to Jesus as “King of the Jews” (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.","summary_en":"18:38-39 What is truth? Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: not guilty. Although he referred to Jesus as “King of the Jews” (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84353,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:38","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:38","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:38-39<\/strong> <em>What is truth?<\/em> Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: <em>not guilty<\/em>. Although he referred to Jesus as <em>“King of the Jews”<\/em> (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:38-39<\/strong> <em>What is truth?<\/em> Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: <em>not guilty<\/em>. Although he referred to Jesus as <em>“King of the Jews”<\/em> (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:38-39 What is truth? Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: not guilty. Although he referred to Jesus as “King of the Jews” (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.","summary_en":"18:38-39 What is truth? Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: not guilty. Although he referred to Jesus as “King of the Jews” (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111979,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:38","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:38","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:38-39<\/strong> <em>What is truth?<\/em> Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: <em>not guilty<\/em>. Although he referred to Jesus as <em>“King of the Jews”<\/em> (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:38-39<\/strong> <em>What is truth?<\/em> Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: <em>not guilty<\/em>. Although he referred to Jesus as <em>“King of the Jews”<\/em> (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:38-39 What is truth? Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: not guilty. Although he referred to Jesus as “King of the Jews” (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.","summary_en":"18:38-39 What is truth? Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: not guilty. Although he referred to Jesus as “King of the Jews” (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139605,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:38","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:38","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:38-39<\/strong> <em>What is truth?<\/em> Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: <em>not guilty<\/em>. Although he referred to Jesus as <em>“King of the Jews”<\/em> (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -10\"><strong>18:38-39<\/strong> <em>What is truth?<\/em> Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: <em>not guilty<\/em>. Although he referred to Jesus as <em>“King of the Jews”<\/em> (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:38-39 What is truth? Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: not guilty. Although he referred to Jesus as “King of the Jews” (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.","summary_en":"18:38-39 What is truth? Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: not guilty. Although he referred to Jesus as “King of the Jews” (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"39":[{"id":3788,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Barabbas","title_en":"Barabbas","content_ro":"<h3>BARABBAS<\/h3>\n<p>Criminal who was released instead of Jesus. All four Gospel writers took note of that event (Mt 27:15-26; Mk 15:6-15; Lk 23:18-25; Jn 18:39-40), as did the apostle Peter in his temple sermon (Acts 3:14).<\/p>\n<p>Barabbas was a bandit and\/or revolutionary (Jn 18:40) who had been imprisoned for committing murder during an insurrection (Mk 15:7; Lk 23:19). (The word translated “robber” in John 18:40 can denote either a bandit or revolutionary.) He was regarded as a notorious prisoner (Mt 27:16). His insurrection may have been an unusually violent act of robbery or an internal struggle among the Jews, but many scholars view it as a political insurrection against the Roman forces in Jerusalem. It is not unlikely that Barabbas was a member of the Zealots, a Jewish political group that sought to throw off the yoke of Rome by violence.<\/p>\n<p>After examining Jesus, the vacillating Roman procurator, Pilate, recognized that Jesus was innocent and wanted to free him. Yet Pilate also had an interest in pleasing the Jewish leaders in order to protect his own political position. In the face of his dilemma he offered to release a prisoner to the Jews at their Passover feast (Jn 18:39). Given the option of Jesus or Barabbas, Pilate thought that the Jewish crowd would choose to have Jesus set free. Pilate underestimated either the mood of the mob or the influence of the Jewish leaders, or both. Whatever the reason, the throng shouted for Barabbas to be released and for Jesus to be crucified (Mt 27:21-22). Consequently, Jesus was crucified and Barabbas, after being released, disappeared from biblical and secular history.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BARABBAS<\/h3>\n<p>Criminal who was released instead of Jesus. All four Gospel writers took note of that event (Mt 27:15-26; Mk 15:6-15; Lk 23:18-25; Jn 18:39-40), as did the apostle Peter in his temple sermon (Acts 3:14).<\/p>\n<p>Barabbas was a bandit and\/or revolutionary (Jn 18:40) who had been imprisoned for committing murder during an insurrection (Mk 15:7; Lk 23:19). (The word translated “robber” in John 18:40 can denote either a bandit or revolutionary.) He was regarded as a notorious prisoner (Mt 27:16). His insurrection may have been an unusually violent act of robbery or an internal struggle among the Jews, but many scholars view it as a political insurrection against the Roman forces in Jerusalem. It is not unlikely that Barabbas was a member of the Zealots, a Jewish political group that sought to throw off the yoke of Rome by violence.<\/p>\n<p>After examining Jesus, the vacillating Roman procurator, Pilate, recognized that Jesus was innocent and wanted to free him. Yet Pilate also had an interest in pleasing the Jewish leaders in order to protect his own political position. In the face of his dilemma he offered to release a prisoner to the Jews at their Passover feast (Jn 18:39). Given the option of Jesus or Barabbas, Pilate thought that the Jewish crowd would choose to have Jesus set free. Pilate underestimated either the mood of the mob or the influence of the Jewish leaders, or both. Whatever the reason, the throng shouted for Barabbas to be released and for Jesus to be crucified (Mt 27:21-22). Consequently, Jesus was crucified and Barabbas, after being released, disappeared from biblical and secular history.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BARABBAS Criminal who was released instead of Jesus. All four Gospel writers took note of that event (Mt 27:15-26; Mk 15:6-15; Lk 23:18-25; Jn 18:39-40), as did the apostle Peter in his temple sermon (Acts 3:14). Barabbas was a bandit and\/or revolutionary (Jn 18:40) who had been imprisoned for committing murder during an insurrection (Mk 15:7; Lk 23:19). (The word translated “robber” in John 18:40 can denote either a bandit or revolutionary.) He was regarded as a notorious prisoner (Mt 27:16)...","summary_en":"BARABBAS Criminal who was released instead of Jesus. All four Gospel writers took note of that event (Mt 27:15-26; Mk 15:6-15; Lk 23:18-25; Jn 18:39-40), as did the apostle Peter in his temple sermon (Acts 3:14). Barabbas was a bandit and\/or revolutionary (Jn 18:40) who had been imprisoned for committing murder during an insurrection (Mk 15:7; Lk 23:19). (The word translated “robber” in John 18:40 can denote either a bandit or revolutionary.) He was regarded as a notorious prisoner (Mt 27:16)...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"40":[{"id":3790,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Barabbas","title_en":"Barabbas","content_ro":"<h3>BARABBAS<\/h3>\n<p>Criminal who was released instead of Jesus. All four Gospel writers took note of that event (Mt 27:15-26; Mk 15:6-15; Lk 23:18-25; Jn 18:39-40), as did the apostle Peter in his temple sermon (Acts 3:14).<\/p>\n<p>Barabbas was a bandit and\/or revolutionary (Jn 18:40) who had been imprisoned for committing murder during an insurrection (Mk 15:7; Lk 23:19). (The word translated “robber” in John 18:40 can denote either a bandit or revolutionary.) He was regarded as a notorious prisoner (Mt 27:16). His insurrection may have been an unusually violent act of robbery or an internal struggle among the Jews, but many scholars view it as a political insurrection against the Roman forces in Jerusalem. It is not unlikely that Barabbas was a member of the Zealots, a Jewish political group that sought to throw off the yoke of Rome by violence.<\/p>\n<p>After examining Jesus, the vacillating Roman procurator, Pilate, recognized that Jesus was innocent and wanted to free him. Yet Pilate also had an interest in pleasing the Jewish leaders in order to protect his own political position. In the face of his dilemma he offered to release a prisoner to the Jews at their Passover feast (Jn 18:39). Given the option of Jesus or Barabbas, Pilate thought that the Jewish crowd would choose to have Jesus set free. Pilate underestimated either the mood of the mob or the influence of the Jewish leaders, or both. Whatever the reason, the throng shouted for Barabbas to be released and for Jesus to be crucified (Mt 27:21-22). Consequently, Jesus was crucified and Barabbas, after being released, disappeared from biblical and secular history.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BARABBAS<\/h3>\n<p>Criminal who was released instead of Jesus. All four Gospel writers took note of that event (Mt 27:15-26; Mk 15:6-15; Lk 23:18-25; Jn 18:39-40), as did the apostle Peter in his temple sermon (Acts 3:14).<\/p>\n<p>Barabbas was a bandit and\/or revolutionary (Jn 18:40) who had been imprisoned for committing murder during an insurrection (Mk 15:7; Lk 23:19). (The word translated “robber” in John 18:40 can denote either a bandit or revolutionary.) He was regarded as a notorious prisoner (Mt 27:16). His insurrection may have been an unusually violent act of robbery or an internal struggle among the Jews, but many scholars view it as a political insurrection against the Roman forces in Jerusalem. It is not unlikely that Barabbas was a member of the Zealots, a Jewish political group that sought to throw off the yoke of Rome by violence.<\/p>\n<p>After examining Jesus, the vacillating Roman procurator, Pilate, recognized that Jesus was innocent and wanted to free him. Yet Pilate also had an interest in pleasing the Jewish leaders in order to protect his own political position. In the face of his dilemma he offered to release a prisoner to the Jews at their Passover feast (Jn 18:39). Given the option of Jesus or Barabbas, Pilate thought that the Jewish crowd would choose to have Jesus set free. Pilate underestimated either the mood of the mob or the influence of the Jewish leaders, or both. Whatever the reason, the throng shouted for Barabbas to be released and for Jesus to be crucified (Mt 27:21-22). Consequently, Jesus was crucified and Barabbas, after being released, disappeared from biblical and secular history.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BARABBAS Criminal who was released instead of Jesus. All four Gospel writers took note of that event (Mt 27:15-26; Mk 15:6-15; Lk 23:18-25; Jn 18:39-40), as did the apostle Peter in his temple sermon (Acts 3:14). Barabbas was a bandit and\/or revolutionary (Jn 18:40) who had been imprisoned for committing murder during an insurrection (Mk 15:7; Lk 23:19). (The word translated “robber” in John 18:40 can denote either a bandit or revolutionary.) He was regarded as a notorious prisoner (Mt 27:16)...","summary_en":"BARABBAS Criminal who was released instead of Jesus. All four Gospel writers took note of that event (Mt 27:15-26; Mk 15:6-15; Lk 23:18-25; Jn 18:39-40), as did the apostle Peter in his temple sermon (Acts 3:14). Barabbas was a bandit and\/or revolutionary (Jn 18:40) who had been imprisoned for committing murder during an insurrection (Mk 15:7; Lk 23:19). (The word translated “robber” in John 18:40 can denote either a bandit or revolutionary.) He was regarded as a notorious prisoner (Mt 27:16)...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56728,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:40","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:40","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:40<\/strong> Jesus was no threat to Rome, but <em>Barabbas was a revolutionary<\/em><em>,<\/em> a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:40<\/strong> Jesus was no threat to Rome, but <em>Barabbas was a revolutionary<\/em><em>,<\/em> a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:40 Jesus was no threat to Rome, but Barabbas was a revolutionary, a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.","summary_en":"18:40 Jesus was no threat to Rome, but Barabbas was a revolutionary, a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84354,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:40","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:40","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:40<\/strong> Jesus was no threat to Rome, but <em>Barabbas was a revolutionary<\/em><em>,<\/em> a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:40<\/strong> Jesus was no threat to Rome, but <em>Barabbas was a revolutionary<\/em><em>,<\/em> a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:40 Jesus was no threat to Rome, but Barabbas was a revolutionary, a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.","summary_en":"18:40 Jesus was no threat to Rome, but Barabbas was a revolutionary, a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111980,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:40","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:40","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:40<\/strong> Jesus was no threat to Rome, but <em>Barabbas was a revolutionary<\/em><em>,<\/em> a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:40<\/strong> Jesus was no threat to Rome, but <em>Barabbas was a revolutionary<\/em><em>,<\/em> a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:40 Jesus was no threat to Rome, but Barabbas was a revolutionary, a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.","summary_en":"18:40 Jesus was no threat to Rome, but Barabbas was a revolutionary, a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139606,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 18:40","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 18:40","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:40<\/strong> Jesus was no threat to Rome, but <em>Barabbas was a revolutionary<\/em><em>,<\/em> a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:40<\/strong> Jesus was no threat to Rome, but <em>Barabbas was a revolutionary<\/em><em>,<\/em> a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:40 Jesus was no threat to Rome, but Barabbas was a revolutionary, a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.","summary_en":"18:40 Jesus was no threat to Rome, but Barabbas was a revolutionary, a violent man who took part in political uprisings (see Luke 23:19), with a proven capacity to challenge the Roman military occupation of Israel.","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"}}